Home » General Discussions » Heated Discussions and Debates » pawkyfox's Another Thread
() 1 Vote
pawkyfox's Another Thread [message #353988] |
Fri, 10 October 2008 14:24 |
|
Spoony
Messages: 3915 Registered: January 2006
Karma: 0
|
General (3 Stars) Tactics & Strategies Moderator |
|
|
pawkyfox wrote on Wed, 08 October 2008 21:10 | Do you believe in God?
Yes, I am Christian. A prophecy was written and Jesus came and fulfilled the prophecy; it could not have been an accident. I would like to talk more about my beliefs but maybe in another thread.
|
so... here's the another thread. where to begin?
let's ignore the rather awkward fact that we have no real proof jesus existed at all... take the bible as proof, if you like. so let's look at that proof.
the four gospels, which in any case were written long, long after jesus' supposed death, wildly disagree on every single major event of his life. the virgin birth, jesus' lineage, the 'flight into egypt', the sermon on the mount, judas' betrayal, peter's denial, the crucifixion and the resurrection.
it isn't hard to figure out that the new testament is full of lame attempts to make the original messiah prophecies come out right; there's a very telling sentence in Matthew where he actually says so. "All of this was done, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet." this was referring to Jesus' travel into Jerusalem riding an ass, 'prophecied' back in the old testament. another example, Luke makes an ultimately vain attempt to make the whole business take place around the right time by giving three historical references happening at the time of Jesus' birth; the name of the king of Syria, the fact Herod ruled Judea, and the fact Emperor Augustus was running a census at the time. problem is, though, these don't even match up to the right date. nice try, but historically it falls on its face.
moving on the virgin birth itself; read the new testament and please point out a verse for me where jesus says his mother was a virgin, or her apparently having recollection at all of giving birth without first having sex (cos you'd think that was remarkable, wouldn't you...?), or being visited by angels and so on.
and where did the virgin birth take place? bethlehem, right? in John's gospel, people very specifically say how surprised they are that Jesus was not born in Bethlehem like the prophecy said he would be. the other gospels say he was born in bethlehem, but can't agree how his parents got there. again, this is your basis for believing in Christianity?
what else? well, jesus was descended from kings, wasn't he? right back to the line of David? shame the gospels wildly disagree on that too, a massive difference in the number of generations stretching back from Joseph. that's if we're assuming Joseph's lineage means a damn thing, cos I thought he had no part in the conception in any case?
I could go on; the point is obvious. the only 'evidence' for jesus' existence at all (never mind his supposed divinity and ability to redeem and so on) is a book which horribly contradicts itself at every turn, is full of historical wrongness, and quite evidently contains a bunch of usually feeble contortions to make the original prophecies look like they've come true.
Unleash the Renerageâ„¢
Renedrama [ren-i-drah-muh]
- noun
1. the inevitable criticism one receives after doing something awful
|
|
|
|
Re: pawkyfox's Another Thread [message #353992 is a reply to message #353988] |
Fri, 10 October 2008 14:31 |
|
cheesesoda
Messages: 6507 Registered: March 2003 Location: Jackson, Michigan
Karma: 0
|
General (5 Stars) |
|
|
Actually, there is proof that Jesus existed and that he did consider himself to be the messiah. Problem is, he wasn't the only one, nor was he the only one to actually be crucified for it.
Oh, and you forgot to mention the part where it states, in the gospels (I forget which one, specifically), that Jesus was the only one to ever ascend into Heaven, yet in the Old Testament, Ezekiel is ascended.
whoa.
[Updated on: Fri, 10 October 2008 14:32] Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
|
Re: pawkyfox's Another Thread [message #354019 is a reply to message #353988] |
Fri, 10 October 2008 22:06 |
|
NukeIt15
Messages: 987 Registered: February 2003 Location: Out to lunch
Karma: 0
|
Colonel |
|
|
Quote: | Actually Jesus did exist and was a major contributer to the spread of Christianity in his time. The fact he actually considered himself as the messiah is a totally separate matter.. but he existed none the less.
|
I'd normally not poke my head into somebody else's religion like this, but Jesus could not have contributed to the spread of Christianity in his own time. Certainly, his legacy contributed to the spread of Christianity, but the religion simply didn't exist before Saul of Tarsus (better known as Paul) came along. Until that time, "Christianity" was nothing more nor less than a reformist movement within Judaism. That is what Jesus contributed to the spread of during his lifetime. The fact that his movement took root and later split with Judaism to become its own faith was not the result of any action he took before being crucified.
Whether or not he made any direct contribution after being crucified depends greatly on your sources and beliefs, but it is an incontrovertible fact that there were no Christians while Jesus was alive. His followers and their followers neither called nor considered themselves such until long afterwards.
"Arms discourage and keep the invader and plunderer in awe, and preserve order in the world as well as property. Horrid mischief would ensue were (the law-abiding) deprived of the use of them." - Thomas Paine
Remember, kids: illiteracy is cool. If you took the time to read this, you are clearly a loser who will never get laid. You've been warned.
|
|
|
|
Re: pawkyfox's Another Thread [message #354538 is a reply to message #353992] |
Wed, 15 October 2008 18:21 |
|
Quackpunk
Messages: 128 Registered: March 2006
Karma: 0
|
Recruit |
|
|
cheesesoda wrote on Fri, 10 October 2008 16:31 | Actually, there is proof that Jesus existed and that he did consider himself to be the messiah. Problem is, he wasn't the only one, nor was he the only one to actually be crucified for it.
Oh, and you forgot to mention the part where it states, in the gospels (I forget which one, specifically), that Jesus was the only one to ever ascend into Heaven, yet in the Old Testament, Ezekiel is ascended.
|
Jesus ascended into heaven to sit at the right hand of God, and begin his messianic kingdom through active-love. Elijah and Ezekiel (was it Ezekiel?.. I think it was Enoch) both ascended to heaven in physically human form.
Spectator
|
|
|
|
Re: pawkyfox's Another Thread [message #355478 is a reply to message #354596] |
Wed, 22 October 2008 22:06 |
|
Quackpunk
Messages: 128 Registered: March 2006
Karma: 0
|
Recruit |
|
|
cheesesoda wrote on Thu, 16 October 2008 08:27 | So they all had their physical bodies ascend into heaven. Funny how that doesn't change what I said.
|
It is not the physical aspect that the gospel is talking about. It's the spiritual nature of the ascension. I hate when people make this ridiculous arguments against the Bible, and they really have no evidence other than what they read on another I-Hate-Christianity thread.
Spectator
|
|
|
|
|
Re: pawkyfox's Another Thread [message #355561 is a reply to message #353988] |
Thu, 23 October 2008 16:11 |
|
cheesesoda
Messages: 6507 Registered: March 2003 Location: Jackson, Michigan
Karma: 0
|
General (5 Stars) |
|
|
How does one's spirit not ascend with their body, though?
As for leaving my faith... the realization that the God that is in the Bible can't possibly exist and be loving, logical, and just. Also, what kind of God would want his creation to ignore the pleasures of the world? Promises of a higher purpose that cannot possibly be proven? Pfft.
whoa.
[Updated on: Thu, 23 October 2008 19:55] Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
|
Re: pawkyfox's Another Thread [message #355656 is a reply to message #355561] |
Fri, 24 October 2008 13:01 |
|
Quackpunk
Messages: 128 Registered: March 2006
Karma: 0
|
Recruit |
|
|
cheesesoda wrote on Thu, 23 October 2008 18:11 | How does one's spirit not ascend with their body, though?
As for leaving my faith... the realization that the God that is in the Bible can't possibly exist and be loving, logical, and just. Also, what kind of God would want his creation to ignore the pleasures of the world? Promises of a higher purpose that cannot possibly be proven? Pfft.
|
Pleasures of this world? You mean sin? Sin is present to give man a choice between the temporary pleasure of this world verse the eternal gifts awaiting in heaven (God doesn't want robots following him). Have you ever read Brothers Karamazov, or any article related to the Grand Inquisitor Chapter in the book? God is loving and just, but who he is what he does is by NO means logical. In fact, the love that God displays towards us is of the most irrational sense out there. Trying to prove its existence based on sense and reason will only arouse more confusion and doubt. The only way to grasp this active love and the promise of eternity is by turning to Jesus Christ and his unconditional love.
Mystery is a evident characteristic of God, and if everything concerning him was proven, there would be no drive in people to know more, thus why he chooses to keep his promise, in an essence, unproven.
Spectator
|
|
|
Re: pawkyfox's Another Thread [message #355657 is a reply to message #353988] |
Fri, 24 October 2008 13:26 |
|
cheesesoda
Messages: 6507 Registered: March 2003 Location: Jackson, Michigan
Karma: 0
|
General (5 Stars) |
|
|
It's just hilarious that everything that IS pleasurable is deemed as sin in the Bible. That sounds more like it's nothing more than a way to control the masses. It just fits well with the human psyche that always wants more. Like on a game show, the person can either walk with the $5000 or jeopardize that money for more money or a better prize. Of course, you're going to get people to follow that way.
What love? The fact that he's using us as pawns in a game with Satan over our souls? What about the horrible things he's done to mankind, apparently "His" greatest and most prized creation (ie. Flood, Sodom & Gomorrah, Job, etc...)? "I love my car, so let me hit it with a brick."
Plus, I can't possibly imagine that a just God would allow billions of people to suffer for eternity because they failed to believe in the correct faith. I'm supposed to believe that a collection of books, written by man, is somehow the absolute truth and somehow inerrant, and if I don't, I am damned for eternity? Give me a break.
Either Christians/Muslims/Jews are mistaken about the identity of their Creator or their Creator doesn't exist.
whoa.
|
|
|
Re: pawkyfox's Another Thread [message #355661 is a reply to message #353988] |
Fri, 24 October 2008 14:22 |
Muad Dib15
Messages: 839 Registered: July 2007 Location: behind a computer screen,...
Karma: 0
|
Colonel |
|
|
Think of it as training wheels. We say that our God is a loving and caring God. You would probably be a loving and caring parent right?
Think of it this way, Us (the human race) are like a 4 year old on our bike. God would be the parent running along side and helping them. So, would you rather have him continue running along side of you to catch you incase you fall? Yes, but God knows that in order to become a proficient bike rider, we have to learn to ride without having him catch us all the time when we fall. I hope you figure out where I'm going with this, as it was explained better in the book I read.
The manliest post on the internet
|
|
|
|
|
Re: pawkyfox's Another Thread [message #355681 is a reply to message #355656] |
Fri, 24 October 2008 16:45 |
|
Ryu
Messages: 2833 Registered: September 2006 Location: Liverpool, England.
Karma: 0
|
General (2 Stars) |
|
|
Quackpunk wrote on Fri, 24 October 2008 21:01 |
cheesesoda wrote on Thu, 23 October 2008 18:11 | How does one's spirit not ascend with their body, though?
As for leaving my faith... the realization that the God that is in the Bible can't possibly exist and be loving, logical, and just. Also, what kind of God would want his creation to ignore the pleasures of the world? Promises of a higher purpose that cannot possibly be proven? Pfft.
|
Pleasures of this world? You mean sin? Sin is present to give man a choice between the temporary pleasure of this world verse the eternal gifts awaiting in heaven (God doesn't want robots following him). Have you ever read Brothers Karamazov, or any article related to the Grand Inquisitor Chapter in the book? God is loving and just, but who he is what he does is by NO means logical. In fact, the love that God displays towards us is of the most irrational sense out there. Trying to prove its existence based on sense and reason will only arouse more confusion and doubt. The only way to grasp this active love and the promise of eternity is by turning to Jesus Christ and his unconditional love.
Mystery is a evident characteristic of God, and if everything concerning him was proven, there would be no drive in people to know more, thus why he chooses to keep his promise, in an essence, unproven.
|
yeah but you only get one life, not fair if we can't experience it how you want to.
Muad Dib15 wrote on Fri, 24 October 2008 22:22 | Think of it as training wheels. We say that our God is a loving and caring God. You would probably be a loving and caring parent right?
Think of it this way, Us (the human race) are like a 4 year old on our bike. God would be the parent running along side and helping them. So, would you rather have him continue running along side of you to catch you incase you fall? Yes, but God knows that in order to become a proficient bike rider, we have to learn to ride without having him catch us all the time when we fall. I hope you figure out where I'm going with this, as it was explained better in the book I read.
|
So you're saying.. if I fall off my bike, I'm fucked? because I sinned but God doesn't come down and give me advice (Advice being a bandage for the fall)..?
flawed if you ask me.
Presence is a curious thing, if you think you need to prove it... you probably never had it in the first place.
[Updated on: Fri, 24 October 2008 16:49] Report message to a moderator
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: pawkyfox's Another Thread [message #355938 is a reply to message #355657] |
Sun, 26 October 2008 23:20 |
|
Quackpunk
Messages: 128 Registered: March 2006
Karma: 0
|
Recruit |
|
|
cheesesoda wrote on Fri, 24 October 2008 15:26 | It's just hilarious that everything that IS pleasurable is deemed as sin in the Bible. That sounds more like it's nothing more than a way to control the masses. It just fits well with the human psyche that always wants more. Like on a game show, the person can either walk with the $5000 or jeopardize that money for more money or a better prize. Of course, you're going to get people to follow that way.
What love? The fact that he's using us as pawns in a game with Satan over our souls? What about the horrible things he's done to mankind, apparently "His" greatest and most prized creation (ie. Flood, Sodom & Gomorrah, Job, etc...)? "I love my car, so let me hit it with a brick."
Plus, I can't possibly imagine that a just God would allow billions of people to suffer for eternity because they failed to believe in the correct faith. I'm supposed to believe that a collection of books, written by man, is somehow the absolute truth and somehow inerrant, and if I don't, I am damned for eternity? Give me a break.
Either Christians/Muslims/Jews are mistaken about the identity of their Creator or their Creator doesn't exist.
|
God does not commit evil on man, the enemy does. Everyone is in a spiritual war. And the Bible says, one way or another, every man and woman has had the opportunity to accept faith of Jesus Christ, just like you have had yours.
When you say pleasures of this world do you mean sex, alcohol, and drugs, etc..? God designed sex, and he wants man to have sex, but with only one other human (your wife) of the opposite gender. Hence when people have sex with multiple humans, disease spreads and people's lives are screwed up, simply because God did not design sex to operate that way. As for alcohol and drugs, etc.., what pleasurable outcome do they result in? Sure you can live in the moment for a while, but even by earthly standards, they are destructive and life ruining
The Bible is absolute truth, it is also infallible, but I do not believe it is inerrant. I believe the human authors have made mistakes, but these mistakes do not contradict the ultimate message that God is trying to get across.
If we are meant to be controlled pawns, than why didn't God create robots? Why would he instill free choice? Have you read the story of the flood, or Soddom and Gomorrah? These people had no spiritual guidance or discernment, so God's wrath was thrown upon them. Man is not designed to sin, man is designed to worship God, and when man refuses to do so, he is bestowing punishment on himself.
Spectator
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Wed Nov 06 03:24:59 MST 2024
Total time taken to generate the page: 0.01281 seconds
|