Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
6 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 13/17 Hour: 1/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Divinity of Jesus
Grizz
Member (Idle past 5471 days)
Posts: 318
Joined: 06-08-2007


Message 196 of 517 (462098)
03-30-2008 8:01 PM
Reply to: Message 195 by iano
03-30-2008 7:25 PM


I am simply forming an opinion in response to a question. As with any opinion, it may or may not be true. I wasn't there -- I don't know. Everything I am offering for discussion can quite possibly be complete and utter rubbish.
Why does any religion grow? Any answer needs to include the social, political, religious, and economic climates in which they took hold. I was attempting to offer just such an answer based on what I know of the period. There are about as many theories as to why and how Christianity spread as there are theorists. The same applies for Islam, Buddhism, or any other belief system.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 195 by iano, posted 03-30-2008 7:25 PM iano has not replied

  
Dawn Bertot
Member
Posts: 3571
Joined: 11-23-2007


Message 197 of 517 (462106)
03-31-2008 1:29 AM
Reply to: Message 195 by iano
03-30-2008 7:25 PM


iano writes
The section starting at 1:18 happens to be entitled "God's Wrath Against Mankind" in the NIV version.
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Romans 1:18 The wrath of God is being revealed from heaven against all the godlessness and wickedness of men who suppress the truth by their wickedness..
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The "come to buddy Jesus" gospel wouldn't have been the one preached then. The good news was good news in the light of the bad news.
And like all faithful and uninformed Humanists iano, will not be happy until God or the gods do things exacally how he thinks they should be done or some other human with another very different opinion. Tell me iano, excally which human being or group of human beings should God design his plans around. There are so many well-intentioned people out there. Humanists say "man is the measure of all things"., but the question is "What man"?. Hitler, Stalin, Plato? Whos philosophy should we adopt?
And like all poor expositors, iano fails to see the glaring part of the verse he quotes which says, "who SUPRESS the truth in wickedness and godlessness"., iano wishes that God would just leave us alone to perform any amount of perversness that we choose. But why would you expect any less from a staunch Humanist. He sees the principle of Free Will in his every day walk of life when dealing with local authorities and understands that his freedom does not imply he can do anything he want without consequences. But when he comes to God, he demands that God do it his way.
Your whole post amounts to nothing but crying and complaining, get off the POT as you call it and atleast try and make a valid Damn argument.
D Bertot

This message is a reply to:
 Message 195 by iano, posted 03-30-2008 7:25 PM iano has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 198 by iano, posted 03-31-2008 5:20 AM Dawn Bertot has not replied

  
iano
Member (Idle past 1941 days)
Posts: 6165
From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland.
Joined: 07-27-2005


Message 198 of 517 (462111)
03-31-2008 5:20 AM
Reply to: Message 197 by Dawn Bertot
03-31-2008 1:29 AM


Bertot writes:
Your whole post amounts to nothing but crying and complaining, get off the POT as you call it and at least try and make a valid Damn argument.
This "faithful and uninformed humanist" actually happens to be a born again Christian. It's reasonable to suppose that you missed my argument by a similarily wide mark. So let me spell it out for you..
Grizz was putting the spread of Christianity down to the "Unbeatable Bargain God!!" on offer. In attempting to divert him from that course of thinking I was pointing out that God on offer actually happens to be very angry with mankind. So angry is he that he wiped them out in a flood once. So hating of their wickedness that he will condemn the majority (who happen to be charting a course down the broad road that leads to destruction as we speak) to Hell. "Buddy Jesus" is the best person to go to if it's talk of Hell you want - for no one talks about it and the fate of those who go there more than he does.
God so loves the world. But God help someone who spurns what his love resulted in him doing. The truth is a double edged sword - in this case used to trim the loose edges from Grizz's point of view.
Edited by iano, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 197 by Dawn Bertot, posted 03-31-2008 1:29 AM Dawn Bertot has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 201 by Grizz, posted 03-31-2008 7:30 PM iano has replied

  
Dawn Bertot
Member
Posts: 3571
Joined: 11-23-2007


Message 199 of 517 (462119)
03-31-2008 9:07 AM
Reply to: Message 195 by iano
03-30-2008 7:25 PM


Sorry, iano, it appeared that everything was counterfactual to the Christian premise, ie:
IF God of wrath message THEN give me the gods any day.
IF God of grace message THEN why Islam?
Christian premise., ie:
It seemed a bit ambiguous, again sorry.
D Bertot

This message is a reply to:
 Message 195 by iano, posted 03-30-2008 7:25 PM iano has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 200 by iano, posted 03-31-2008 9:39 AM Dawn Bertot has not replied

  
iano
Member (Idle past 1941 days)
Posts: 6165
From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland.
Joined: 07-27-2005


Message 200 of 517 (462122)
03-31-2008 9:39 AM
Reply to: Message 199 by Dawn Bertot
03-31-2008 9:07 AM


No worries mate.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 199 by Dawn Bertot, posted 03-31-2008 9:07 AM Dawn Bertot has not replied

  
Grizz
Member (Idle past 5471 days)
Posts: 318
Joined: 06-08-2007


Message 201 of 517 (462157)
03-31-2008 7:30 PM
Reply to: Message 198 by iano
03-31-2008 5:20 AM


Grizz was putting the spread of Christianity down to the "Unbeatable Bargain God!!" on offer. In attempting to divert him from that course of thinking I was pointing out that God on offer actually happens to be very angry with mankind. So angry is he that he wiped them out in a flood once. So hating of their wickedness that he will condemn the majority (who happen to be charting a course down the broad road that leads to destruction as we speak) to Hell. "Buddy Jesus" is the best person to go to if it's talk of Hell you want - for no one talks about it and the fate of those who go there more than he does.
Bargain?, no. Most beneficial?, yes. One had more to gain on a personal level from Christianity than what the pagan gods could offer, both temporally and in the hereafter.
What god is not angry for one reason or another? All of the gods of antiquity are prone to spells of anger, rage, or jealousy; this anger is usually, but not always, directed towards mankind. All of the religious literature of antiquity has one thing in common: The deity(ies) is prone to spasmodic fits of anger and rage directed against the creation. The retribution usually takes the form of destruction and violence.
Any members of a religion or sect will be commanded through Divine mandate to adhere to the requirements put before them. Failure to comply brings forth wrath, anger, and punishment. Divine retribution for mortal indiscretions is not exactly a new concept to Pagan society. If anything, the whole world of Paganism was immersed in the fear of godly retribution.
For Pagan Rome, the gods were very temperamental and the culture spent a great deal of time, money, and effort simply to keep the gods placated, happy, and off their backs. In return, the gods would keep the crops from rotting, keep the invaders out, and keep the economy prosperous. Huge sums of money were spent on constantly building and refurbishing the pagan temple structures and this nearly bankrupt the economy during the reign of Nero. People were growing weary of the economic toll created by the temple culture but felt too powerless and fearfull to challenge the gods. When the crops soured or there was word of calamity, this was a sign to build more temples and offer more sacrifice. Everything that happened in Rome during this period was somehow thought to be related to the happenings in the temples.
Pagans no doubt heard the message that the God of Jesus also demanded adherence to divine mandate and would meet out punishment to those who refused to listen. But in addition to the typical anger and retribution directed towards the derelicts, this unique God of Jesus was capable of offering something to his followers at no extra charge, something the Pagan Gods never did - purpose and meaning to life, compassion, pity, love, brotherhood, forgiveness. These Divine messages simply did not exist in Pagan Rome, anywhere.
Furthermore, this God does not require temples or taxes to keep his anger in check; This God does not stipulate that the success of this year's crop is contingent upon a sufficient amount of temple sacrifice or ritualistic groveling. No burnt offerings or devotionals are required to stop disease, pestilence, famine, or foreign invasion. Instead, they heard something different - 'God will provide for his followers free of charge. Do not worry what you are to eat or drink. The God of Jesus takes care of the least of his creation, so he will take care of you as well.'
Early Christian were also sharing the news that, Unlike the pagan gods who simply toy with mankind, this one God is coming soon to rescue his followers and usher them to paradise. If you are not onboard when this happens, you have a serious problem.
How early Christians went about proselytizing, we simply don't know. There are no written records from the period following the crucifixion up to the period when Paul of Tarsus compiled his first letter. That is roughly two-decades of silence. Paul is the first individual to record anything about the dynamics of the Christian community. The Gospels had not yet been put into writing at this early time and were a relatively late arrival. Everything was conveyed via word-of-mouth. Jesus commanded his followers to go forth and preach the good news, not write down what you hear and pass around manuscripts. When the Gospels started appearing in print, there were lots of them, and no doubt they contained pieces of the verbal tradition that was being passed around.
How did early Christians spread the message? Did they offer to share dinner, stand on the street corner and preach, invite passer-by's to informal gatherings? Perhaps some were simply curious about the stories regarding the band of followers of this Jewish mystic named Jesus, who they hard was raised from the dead. We do know Christians were not persecuted at this time and were free to go about their business as they pleased. It wasn't until converts to Christianity started depleting the ranks from the temples that Rome took notice. Rome did not prohibit religious freedom as long as the sect did not incite the masses. We can assume then that they had the freedom to proselytize as they saw fit.
Regardless of how they went about proselytizing, the message was obviously appealing enough to get people to stick around to listen to the whole story. My opinion as sated is, the Christian community not only offered the pagan and gentile a revolutionary way of thinking about the Divine, but also a sense of purpose, meaning, and civility, all packaged up with an offer of eternal paradise that would be bestowed upon believers when Jesus soon returned to rescue his followers from this world.
Not a bad exchange at all IMO.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 198 by iano, posted 03-31-2008 5:20 AM iano has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 202 by Dawn Bertot, posted 04-01-2008 1:48 AM Grizz has not replied
 Message 203 by jaywill, posted 04-01-2008 8:54 AM Grizz has replied
 Message 207 by iano, posted 04-02-2008 7:13 PM Grizz has not replied

  
Dawn Bertot
Member
Posts: 3571
Joined: 11-23-2007


Message 202 of 517 (462173)
04-01-2008 1:48 AM
Reply to: Message 201 by Grizz
03-31-2008 7:30 PM


.
Regardless of how they went about proselytizing, the message was obviously appealing enough to get people to stick around to listen to the whole story. My opinion as sated is, the Christian community not only offered the pagan and gentile a revolutionary way of thinking about the Divine, but also a sense of purpose, meaning, and civility, all packaged up with an offer of eternal paradise that would be bestowed upon believers when Jesus soon returned to rescue his followers from this world.
Your views certainly show a certain insight to the events of those days. I think if we combine, these with the comments of iano, we, kind of get an overall picture, or atleast a close one. I however, I would be more interested in your own personal beliefs about all of these things, are they to be believed as real, historical Jesus, reliability of the NT and the stories that are contained in them. to bring us closer to the original design of this thread by Jon.
thanks
D Bertot.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 201 by Grizz, posted 03-31-2008 7:30 PM Grizz has not replied

  
jaywill
Member (Idle past 1941 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 203 of 517 (462185)
04-01-2008 8:54 AM
Reply to: Message 201 by Grizz
03-31-2008 7:30 PM


The deity(ies) is prone to spasmodic fits of anger and rage directed against the creation. The retribution usually takes the form of destruction and violence.
I dont't see anything in the Bible which I would discribe a "spasmodic fits of anger and rage" on the part of the God of the Bible.
This is not to say that God does not get angry in the Bible. There is one notable place among many where God's mercy and longsuffering were His attitude but He was misrepresented as being angry by a spiritual leader, Moses.
God did not allow Moses of all people to enter into the promised good land. Why? Because in one instance Moses misrepresented God by being extremely displeased with the Israelites when God was not. God says that Moses failed to sanctify Him before the people, misrepresented the divine attitude. And for that reason Moses was disciplined to not be allowed to enter into Canaan.
Moses would be only allowed to go to the top of Mount Pisgah and see the good land. But even he, the leader, would not be allowed to enter.
And Moses took the rod from before Jehovah, as He had commanded him. And Moses and Aaron gathered the congregation together before the rock, and he said to them, Listen now, you rebels: Shall we bring forth water for you out of this rock?
Then Moses lifted up his hand and struck the rock with his rod twice; and abundant water came forth, and the assembly and their livestock drank.
And Jehovah said to Moses and Aaron, Because you did not believe in Me, to sanctify Me in the sight of the children of Israel, therefore you shall not bring this congregation into the land which I have given them.
These are the waters of Meribah, where the children of Israel contended with Jehovah, and He was sanctified among them."
(Numbers 20:9-11)
The study note in the Recovery Version says about the passage:
To sanctify God is to make Him holy, i.e., separate from all the false gods; to fail to sanctify God is to make Him common. Inbeing angry with the people (v.10) and in wrongly striking the rock twice (v.11), Moses failed to sanctify God. In being angry when God was not angry, Moses did not represent God rightly in His holy nature, and in striking the rock twice, he did not keep God's word in His economy (see note 8(1), par. 2). Thus, Moses offended both God's holy nature and His divine economy. Because of this, even though he was intimate with God and may be considered a companion of God (Exo.33:11), Moses lost the right to enter the good land.
As a leader of God's people Moses' attititude should have been in accordance with God's attitude. The angry actions of Moses were counted as rebellion by God because they represented to the people divine anger when God was not angry.
But there is deeper significance to be found because the rock represents Christ. Christ was smitten by the judgment of God once for all people. After that He does not have to be slain again on any cross. We only need to speak to Him and divine life in the Holy Spirit (symbolized by the thirst quenching water from the rock) flows out of Him to refresh us and make us spiritually alive.
God had told Moses to smite the rock once before to represent the one time death of Christ. Water flowed out of the smitten rock. The next instance in which Moses failed to sanctify God, God had told him only to speak to the rock. Compare Exodus 17:6 and Numbers 20:8.
"The rock in this chapter typifies the crucified and resurrected Christ (1 Cor. 10:4b), and the water that flowed from the rock typifies the Spirit (1 Cor.10:4a) as the living water that flowed out of the crucified Christ (John 19:34 ...). In Exodus 17 Moses struck the rock with his rod, and water flowed out for the people to drink.
According to Paul's word in 1 Cor. 10:4 ..., this rock was a spiritual rock that followed God's people in their journey through the wilderness. This signifies that Christ has been crucified to become a rock that follows His people. This following rock is the resurrected Christ as the life giving Spirit (1 Cor. 14:45), who is always with the church to supply His believers with the water of life.
Since Christ has been crucified and the Spirit has been given, there is no need for Christ to be crucified again, i.e., no need to strike the rock again, that the living water may flow. In God's economy Christ should be crucified only once (Heb. 7:27;9:26-28). To receive the living water from the crucified Christ, we need only to "take the rod" and "speak to the rock." To take the rod is to identify with Christ in His death and apply the death of Christ to ourselves and our situatation. To speak to the rock is to speak a direct word to Christ as the smitten rock, asking Him to give us the Spirit of life (compare JOhn 4:10) based on the fact tht the SPirit has already been given. If we apply the death of Christ to ourselves and ask Christ in faith to give us the Spirit, we will receive the living Spirit as the bountiful supply of life (Phil.1:19)
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 201 by Grizz, posted 03-31-2008 7:30 PM Grizz has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 205 by Grizz, posted 04-01-2008 6:31 PM jaywill has replied

  
Grizz
Member (Idle past 5471 days)
Posts: 318
Joined: 06-08-2007


Message 204 of 517 (462236)
04-01-2008 6:06 PM


Your views certainly show a certain insight to the events of those days. I think if we combine, these with the comments of iano, we, kind of get an overall picture, or atleast a close one. I however, I would be more interested in your own personal beliefs about all of these things, are they to be believed as real, historical Jesus, reliability of the NT and the stories that are contained in them. to bring us closer to the original design of this thread by Jon.
That is my personal opinion on how Christianity was able to rise from being just one of a multitude of small sects within Judaism to enjoying popularity with the Gentile and Pagan communities. The OP was inviting us to share opinions based on historical records.
Regarding my personal opinions on the other questions you posed? Those would be great topics for new threads. It would be better for us all if we spent a bit of time outlining how our opinions were formed on specific questions rather than lumping them together here as bundled statements. I advise this approach simply to avoid the usual static that will turn this thread into a WWF Smack-Down. Any simple answer offered up will inevitably result in members attacking the conclusion rather than the methods or reasons used to arrive at them.

Replies to this message:
 Message 206 by Dawn Bertot, posted 04-02-2008 10:37 AM Grizz has not replied

  
Grizz
Member (Idle past 5471 days)
Posts: 318
Joined: 06-08-2007


Message 205 of 517 (462239)
04-01-2008 6:31 PM
Reply to: Message 203 by jaywill
04-01-2008 8:54 AM


I dont't see anything in the Bible which I would discribe a "spasmodic fits of anger and rage" on the part of the God of the Bible.
Hi,
All theistic religions of antiquity have displayed God as prone to fits of anger and rage that results in acts of violence and destruction. In Judea-Christian literature, God's destructive anger against Man is portrayed as playing out Locally(Sodom and Gomorrah), Globally(The Flood), and Universally(The Apocalypse).
Regardless, if what you were saying was true, then it would lend even more credence to the opinions I expressed earlier in reply to lano.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 203 by jaywill, posted 04-01-2008 8:54 AM jaywill has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 208 by jaywill, posted 04-03-2008 9:19 AM Grizz has not replied

  
Dawn Bertot
Member
Posts: 3571
Joined: 11-23-2007


Message 206 of 517 (462305)
04-02-2008 10:37 AM
Reply to: Message 204 by Grizz
04-01-2008 6:06 PM


Regarding my personal opinions on the other questions you posed? Those would be great topics for new threads. It would be better for us all if we spent a bit of time outlining how our opinions were formed on specific questions rather than lumping them together here as bundled statements. I advise this approach simply to avoid the usual static that will turn this thread into a WWF Smack-Down. Any simple answer offered up will inevitably result in members attacking the conclusion rather than the methods or reasons used to arrive at them.
I agree completely, I have admonished others to do this in other posts and threads. Autunman, seems very accomadating in this area, which helps us to proceed in a logical and professional manner. It really moves the discussion along. I dont understand much of what he says after that, due to the fact that he is a egghead and I have to read everything he says, 12 or 15 times, Ha, Ha.
D Bertot

This message is a reply to:
 Message 204 by Grizz, posted 04-01-2008 6:06 PM Grizz has not replied

  
iano
Member (Idle past 1941 days)
Posts: 6165
From: Co. Wicklow, Ireland.
Joined: 07-27-2005


Message 207 of 517 (462382)
04-02-2008 7:13 PM
Reply to: Message 201 by Grizz
03-31-2008 7:30 PM


Grizz writes:
Bargain?, no. Most beneficial?, yes. One had more to gain on a personal level from Christianity than what the pagan gods could offer, both temporally and in the hereafter.
Did the pagan Gods offer an eternity in a lake of fire to the majority exposed to him?
Gain is a relative term: Jesus said to the rich young ruler that he should sell up and ship out. So much for that young mans temporal gain.
-
The deity(ies) is prone to spasmodic fits of anger and rage directed against the creation. The retribution usually takes the form of destruction and violence.
One could describe sexual intercourse as spasmodic in the context of a loving husband and wifes sexual urges... or spasmodic in the context of a rape.
-
Any members of a religion or sect will be commanded through Divine mandate to adhere to the requirements put before them. Failure to comply brings forth wrath, anger, and punishment. Divine retribution for mortal indiscretions is not exactly a new concept to Pagan society. If anything, the whole world of Paganism was immersed in the fear of godly retribution.
I'm a member of Christ and recognise nothing of the above. I will be with God no matter what I do from this day forth. I may be disciplined but wrath, anger and punishment are not mine. No more.
-
For Pagan Rome, the gods were very temperamental and the culture spent a great deal of time, money, and effort simply to keep the gods placated, happy, and off their backs. In return, the gods would keep the crops from rotting, keep the invaders out, and keep the economy prosperous.
Do you really think people could be that gullible? I mean down at street level? One doesn't have to be a scientist to realise that the facts don't fit the hypothesis. How long do you think people would be strung along by the "bad crop this year...mustn't have been enough offering" gig?
How far can intelligence "evolve" in 2000 years...
-
Huge sums of money were spent on constantly building and refurbishing the pagan temple structures and this nearly bankrupt the economy during the reign of Nero. People were growing weary of the economic toll created by the temple culture but felt too powerless and fearfull to challenge the gods. When the crops soured or there was word of calamity, this was a sign to build more temples and offer more sacrifice. Everything that happened in Rome during this period was somehow thought to be related to the happenings in the temples.
Nero was the chap who converted Christians into human torches. If there was any advertisement [i]against[i] Christianity in that period then you couldn't do better than this. Indeed, persecution seems to have been the lot of early Christianity - from Jesus' day forth.
What needs examination is the spread of Christianity in spite of all of the persecution.
The model of the disciples standing up in downtown Jerusalem a short number of weeks after the crucifixion of Jesus continues on to the time of Nero... and beyond.
Myself? I see Christianity as a kind of virus. Persecution is a handgrenade thrown in it's midst. Christianity is splintered into little pieces - and spread over a wide area. Where it takes roots and grows...
-
Pagans no doubt heard the message that the God of Jesus also demanded adherence to divine mandate and would meet out punishment to those who refused to listen.
correction: refused to comply. Those that perish are those described as refusing to love the truth. Refusal is the key
-
But in addition to the typical anger and retribution directed towards the derelicts, this unique God of Jesus was capable of offering something to his followers at no extra charge, something the Pagan Gods never did - purpose and meaning to life, compassion, pity, love, brotherhood, forgiveness. These Divine messages simply did not exist in Pagan Rome, anywhere.
Correction: not in addition. Rather: he offers his wrath or his love via mercy. The God of choice.
-
Furthermore, this God does not require temples or taxes to keep his anger in check; This God does not stipulate that the success of this year's crop is contingent upon a sufficient amount of temple sacrifice or ritualistic groveling. No burnt offerings or devotionals are required to stop disease, pestilence, famine, or foreign invasion. Instead, they heard something different - 'God will provide for his followers free of charge. Do not worry what you are to eat or drink. The God of Jesus takes care of the least of his creation, so he will take care of you as well.'
Even if that means your crops will burn or your being riddled with cancer without the benefits of modern day medicine or your being dragged back to persecuting Jersusalem by Saul or your being thrown to the lions.
All you have (rationally and materialistically thinking) is a promise.
-
Early Christian were also sharing the news that, Unlike the pagan gods who simply toy with mankind, this one God is coming soon to rescue his followers and usher them to paradise. If you are not onboard when this happens, you have a serious problem.
A God who promises trouble in this world vs. a god who would provide for this years grain?
-
How early Christians went about proselytizing, we simply don't know. There are no written records from the period following the crucifixion up to the period when Paul of Tarsus compiled his first letter. That is roughly two-decades of silence.
There are records which state themselves to cover the period immediately following Christs death and resurrection. One believes that they are a recordof that time or they don't. One's belief is a different issue though.
-
Paul is the first individual to record anything about the dynamics of the Christian community. The Gospels had not yet been put into writing at this early time and were a relatively late arrival. Everything was conveyed via word-of-mouth. Jesus commanded his followers to go forth and preach the good news, not write down what you hear and pass around manuscripts. When the Gospels started appearing in print, there were lots of them, and no doubt they contained pieces of the verbal tradition that was being passed around.
Which brings up the telative values of word of mouth vs. written word. Clearly, there is nothing stopping word of mouth propagating a notion more accurately than what is written and copied.
-
How did early Christians spread the message? Did they offer to share dinner, stand on the street corner and preach, invite passer-by's to informal gatherings? Perhaps some were simply curious about the stories regarding the band of followers of this Jewish mystic named Jesus, who they hard was raised from the dead. We do know.
I'm 43. At age 7 I fell into a river and was rescued by my mother. I can distinctly remember being in the river and being ridden home in the perambulator of my sister (who was 5 at the time). It's like a video in my head but the details (such as my being 7 and my sister being 5) have become clearer with time.
This is the first written record of that event.
What does it matter when a gospel was written?
-
Christians were not persecuted at this time and were free to go about their business as they pleased. It wasn't until converts to Christianity started depleting the ranks from the temples that Rome took notice. Rome did not prohibit religious freedom as long as the sect did not incite the masses. We can assume then that they had the freedom to proselytize as they saw fit.
There are levels of persecution. Being thrown to lions is a little different that losing ones job. We cannot assume as you do.
-
Regardless of how they went about proselytizing, the message was obviously appealing enough to get people to stick around to listen to the whole story.
Christianity grew. I agree.
Edited by iano, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 201 by Grizz, posted 03-31-2008 7:30 PM Grizz has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 209 by Dawn Bertot, posted 04-03-2008 9:38 AM iano has not replied

  
jaywill
Member (Idle past 1941 days)
Posts: 4519
From: VA USA
Joined: 12-05-2005


Message 208 of 517 (462428)
04-03-2008 9:19 AM
Reply to: Message 205 by Grizz
04-01-2008 6:31 PM


All theistic religions of antiquity have displayed God as prone to fits of anger and rage that results in acts of violence and destruction. In Judea-Christian literature, God's destructive anger against Man is portrayed as playing out Locally(Sodom and Gomorrah), Globally(The Flood), and Universally(The Apocalypse).
Regardless, if what you were saying was true, then it would lend even more credence to the opinions I expressed earlier in reply to lano.
You noticed the flood. Did you notice the rainbow of mercy and the covenant given by God after the flood? Did you notice the rainbow in the book of Revelation around the throne of God in chapter 4?
In the midst of the book of Revelation did you notice the rainbow of mercy around the head of the One Who treads the land and sea in judgement in chapter 10?
I think the phrase "prone to fits of anger and rage" convey to me some kind of preferance to childish temper tandrums. This would be a caricature of the righteous judgment of God.
I would not suggest that the punishment handed down by a civil judge in reaction to a prosecuted crime was due to that judge's inclination to "fits of anger" Considering the full scope of what I see in the Bible, I can't see the imputation of righteous judgment of God as His being prone to fits of anger.
This would be more typical of the view of the criminal who is being punished. He might be there sitting in jail complaining that the court simply had a childish fit of anger to place him under a jail sentence.
With worldly people it may be so. It seems very much not the case to me with the Bible's God.
I might prefer that the ultimate Governor of the univese should simply be an all-incompasing permissivist who allows any moral behavior to go on unchecked? But that is not the case. And when justice is imputed I don't see this as self indulgence on God's part because He likes to have temper fits.
Did you notice this passage in which Christ's disciples wanted God to call fire down to burn up a town that rejected the gospel:
And they went and entered into a village of the Samaratans to prepare for Him. And they did not receive Him, becaise His face was set to go to Jerusalem.
And seeing this, the disciples James and John said, Lord, do You want us to command fire to come down from heaven and consume them?
But turning, He rebuked them and said, You do not know of what kind of spirit you are. The Son of Man has not come to destroy men's lives but to save them. And they went to another village.
(Luke 9:52b-56)
We don't see God prone to a temper fit in this instance.
And though I would not argue that God showed anger in judgment I don't see Him prefering to or being prone to. Rather He states that it is strange for Him to have to judge sinful men in the first place:
"For Jehovah will rise as on Mount Perazim, He will be agitated as in the valley of Gibeon, to do His deed, His strange deed, and to do His work, His most different work." (Isa. 28:21)
In other words, God deems it strange that He should have to carry out this kind of judgment on man at all.
Then again we have an entire Old Testament book of Jonah dedicated to the revelation of God's reluctance to judge a nation rather than His eagerness to do so.
In the case of Sodom, the judgement is preceeded with God's prophet grilling Him concerning whether any righteous in the city would be wrongly lumped in with the unrighteous when God judges.
I think it is significant that in this instance the Bible records how Abraham converses with "the Judge of all the earth" to assure himself and us the readers, that God's judgment, though severe, was nonetheless measured and precise.
How do I know that your charging the Bible's God with "fits of anger and rage" are not just an expression our human proneness to want to be left alone by God to do whatever we please?
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.
Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 205 by Grizz, posted 04-01-2008 6:31 PM Grizz has not replied

  
Dawn Bertot
Member
Posts: 3571
Joined: 11-23-2007


Message 209 of 517 (462429)
04-03-2008 9:38 AM
Reply to: Message 207 by iano
04-02-2008 7:13 PM


iano, I think it might be of great value to hear yours, Autunmans and Jaywills perspective (a brief exposition) on the original topic of, is there anything in history that would point to the divinity of Jesus. I would like to hear you fellas perspectives. Yous and these others insights are always interesting . Just a simple explanation from yalls perspective. If not thats fine too. I think Grizz has already set his out aleast indirectly. What do you think?
D Bertot

This message is a reply to:
 Message 207 by iano, posted 04-02-2008 7:13 PM iano has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 210 by pelican, posted 04-04-2008 11:24 PM Dawn Bertot has not replied

  
pelican
Member (Idle past 4985 days)
Posts: 781
From: australia
Joined: 05-27-2007


Message 210 of 517 (462557)
04-04-2008 11:24 PM
Reply to: Message 209 by Dawn Bertot
04-03-2008 9:38 AM


satan's right hand man?
is there anything in history that would point to the divinity of Jesus.
Looking closely at the life of Jesus, as told in the bible, I believe he was an ordinary human being. He followed his own beliefs and persuaded others to believe the same. The outcome of his beliefs were and still are divisive. The good and the bad.
The examples of righteous living have caused more harm than good. As a parent, I would not advise my children to follow him at all. He sacrificed his life for his beliefs, nothing more and nothing less. In my mind, he was closer to satan than god, leading the meek and suffering up the garden path. Of course, it's only my opinion.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 209 by Dawn Bertot, posted 04-03-2008 9:38 AM Dawn Bertot has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 211 by jaywill, posted 04-05-2008 6:38 AM pelican has replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024