Community > General Religion Chat

Topic: Was he or wasn't he?
deke Joined Mon 12/29/08 Posts: 395	Thu 01/15/09 04:04 PM
Ok then, some of you might know this one: a theological discussion about Xianity (if we can let the other b/s aside). How do you answer the following: Who killed Jesus? Remember, you can not answer with history, but only theological explanations. Hint: If no one ever existed in all time, eternity and the whole universe but you and only you, would Jesus have to die? only if i ate the fruit of good and evil if not then sin wouldn't exist and therefore Jesus(GOD) WOULDN'T HAVE TO HAVE DIED Good and Evil, you judge too quickly. I believe he still would have to die for your sins. Yes then you killed him, so why blame the Jews or blame the Romans, why don't you blame it on the BossaNova? How about taking some responsibility for our actions? huh?

deke Joined Mon 12/29/08 Posts: 395	Thu 01/15/09 04:07 PM
Christians routinely denounce science. It’s like their favorite past time. The fundamentalists do. I don’t want to say all Christians. Many Christians do not insist on taking the bible literally especially the first two accounts of Genesis. They won’t start taking it in a literal sense up until you get to Abraham and all that jazz. But just about EVERY evangelical Christian I have ever met is at odds with science. i truely don't see that. science does more to prove the bible right than it does to disprove it. like sodum and gomuara and a world wide flood Are you referring to "Flood Geology?" Modern geology, and its sub-disciplines of earth science, geochemistry, geophysics, glaciology, paleoclimatology, paleontology all refute the key tenets of flood geology. It doesn’t hold up to any sort of scientific analysis and does not have any standing in the scientific community. you stand on the majorities side but what's to say they are right if you do some studying or just read 1 book besides what is excepted in your community you find out that coal,oil and the geologic column could have only been made by a world wide flood. i know this off topic sorry

Krimsa Joined Fri 04/25/08 Posts: 9960	Thu 01/15/09 04:26 PM Edited by Krimsa on Thu 01/15/09 04:29 PM
That flood stuff is all junk science. Get over it and move on. Yes its

Bushidobillyclub Joined Fri 05/11/07 Posts: 5689	Thu 01/15/09 04:34 PM Edited by Bushidobillyclub on Thu 01/15/09 04:34 PM
Christians routinely denounce science. It’s like their favorite past time. The fundamentalists do. I don’t want to say all Christians. Many Christians do not insist on taking the bible literally especially the first two accounts of Genesis. They won’t start taking it in a literal sense up until you get to Abraham and all that jazz. But just about EVERY evangelical Christian I have ever met is at odds with science. i truely don't see that. science does more to prove the bible right than it does to disprove it. like sodum and gomuara and a world wide flood Are you referring to "Flood Geology?" Modern geology, and its sub-disciplines of earth science, geochemistry, geophysics, glaciology, paleoclimatology, paleontology all refute the key tenets of flood geology. It doesn’t hold up to any sort of scientific analysis and does not have any standing in the scientific community. you stand on the majorities side but what's to say they are right if you do some studying or just read 1 book besides what is excepted in your community you find out that coal,oil and the geologic column could have only been made by a world wide flood. i know this off topic sorry So you sound like you have done some intense research into this, and that is why you can tell us that if we REALLY study then we will understand that the worldwide flood was the only way to have these deposits of coal, oil and other geological strata? Wow that is rich.

Abracadabra Joined Thu 04/12/07 Posts: 17851	Thu 01/15/09 05:14 PM
Folks like this guy below are working hard to alter the course of history regarding education in America, I feel it is my duty to illuminate the falsehoods. People like Dr. Jason Lisle almost convince me that there really is a devil and he truly can possess people. I'll just chalk it up to utter stupidity. The fact that the man has degrees are not impressive at all. I'm met many people who have degrees yet couldn't argue their way out of a paper bag to save their soul. The truly brilliant thinkers of humanity clearly denounced the conclusions that Christians draw from the Bible. Isaac Newton, Albert Einstein, and a myriad of other proven deep thinkers have denounced the biblical picture. Just because a Christian fantatic can satisfy the requirements of educational formalism whilst maintaining absurd idea is not impressive. There are quite a few people who have done that. In fact, what has he done himself but denounce the intelligence of his very own professors. That was a real bright move. All he did there was state that having credentials is meaningless, and then he's going to act like his credentials mean something? What an idiot this guy is. That just vividly shows how totally absurd his arguments are going to be. Argue that Ph.D.s have no clue because they have predetermined ideas. And then turn around and argue that he himself is had Ph.D. and a predetermined idea. He just argued the case that he, himself, has no clout. What an idiot.

TBRich Joined Fri 11/07/08 Posts: 8232	Thu 01/15/09 05:18 PM
Ok then, some of you might know this one: a theological discussion about Xianity (if we can let the other b/s aside). How do you answer the following: Who killed Jesus? Remember, you can not answer with history, but only theological explanations. Hint: If no one ever existed in all time, eternity and the whole universe but you and only you, would Jesus have to die? BTW, I note you did not answer the question posed. Who killed Jesus? Obvious answer: The Jews. As we have already seen, pointing the finger in ANY direction just begins the same old, all too familiar song and dance. Other humans killed him. Does it really have to have any greater meaning? Since I don't believe that Jesus "died" for my sins or anyone else's, for that matter (if I go by your rules), can I actually participate any further and answer your question? By saying it MUST be a Theological discussion, I suspect you exclude many people with valuable input whose otherwise non-Christian Biblical interpretations would be immediately scoffed at (perhaps my perception is off). Oh well... Here I go anyway (but, I anticipate hating myself in the morning ). Saying that to eat of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil would surely result in death obviously (as history has shown) did NOT mean physical death. What did God mean, then? Could this "Knowledge of Good and Evil" represent the human condition (vs. the ease of all already known experience of our higher selves) of judging self and others and the subsequent suffering it can create be the lesson we were purposed to come here for in the first place? Are we not ALL fallen angels who have eaten of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil simply by virtue of being human? Jesus was willing to lay down his life for the truth as was "shown" to him. How does his death make anyone else's journey on Earth any less painful or challenging? We all "sin" and we all ultimately come to terms with it at our time of exit (with hope, perhaps sooner). Many demand that we all step in line and see it singularly. I will not. Why so serious? It was for the Xians who appear to frequently not have a grasp on their own theology.

Krimsa Joined Fri 04/25/08 Posts: 9960	Thu 01/15/09 05:20 PM
Good and Evil, you judge too quickly. I believe he still would have to die for your sins. Yes then you killed him, so why blame the Jews or blame the Romans, why don't you blame it on the BossaNova? How about taking some responsibility for our actions? If the Romans or the Jews (whoever) did not condemn and nail Christ to a pole then no Christian would have a path to salvation today. The entire foundation of the religion would have fallen out. You should be thanking the Romans/Jews.

TBRich Joined Fri 11/07/08 Posts: 8232	Thu 01/15/09 05:21 PM
And don't forget to thank Judas. did you read the last elaine pagels book?

Krimsa Joined Fri 04/25/08 Posts: 9960	Thu 01/15/09 05:28 PM
No. Never heard of her.

TBRich Joined Fri 11/07/08 Posts: 8232	Thu 01/15/09 05:30 PM
She researches gnositic beliefs. Quite good actually, she wrote the gnostic gospels, etc, etc.

Redykeulous Joined Thu 11/09/06 Posts: 6052	Thu 01/15/09 05:44 PM
Well if you give tithes to a church you just might be supporting it a lot more than you realize I wonder how many Christians actually realize that titheing is part of "Old Law" you know, that law that they Jesus made obsolete?? Of course more intelligent poeple agree that Jesus, himself, says he did not come to change anything. So it seems Christians really didn't know much about Jesus in the first place. Do Christians even ask for an accounting of their Tithes? I wonder? I imagine if they did, they might just decide to 'donate' to their own causes rather than the ones someone else has chosen for you. But - again, I suppose it's just easier to tithe, I'm sure some Christians still consider it, the least 'sacrifice' they can make with the least amount of effort.

Redykeulous Joined Thu 11/09/06 Posts: 6052	Thu 01/15/09 05:52 PM
Who killed Jesus? What kind of question is that? Was Jesus really human? That's a better question. If Jesus was not really human, and according to the Bible (at least in one place) Jesus ascended into heaven, in his full form - unlike any other 'human'can do. Also, Jesus was more like a mule, in that he only had the genetic and chromosonal make-up of a female. Although we have known for quite a number of years that a human can be created through cell manipulation, it's also a fairly accepted theory that such beings are "normally" the same sex as the originating cell and they are sterile. So was Jesus even human? Or was Jesus a mule, or a god or a lie? These are much better questions than "Who killed Jesus" - who cares?

Redykeulous Joined Thu 11/09/06 Posts: 6052	Thu 01/15/09 06:12 PM
People like Dr. Jason Lisle almost convince me that there really is a devil and he truly can possess people Well, I agree more with skeptical science. Scientists begin with an idea, and then gather everything they know in relation to that idea. And using theories and hypotheses, they attemt to find more specific information that might be turned into more knowledge. Creation science begins with their concept that "here are all the answers" but how do we fit all the pieces to come up with the answer? Bad science! What is the purpose of such science? If one already has the answer they seek, than any sceince from that point of reference is deconstruction and there is no possible way to ever know if or what steps might be missing in theories of such thought. Attempting to get from a perceived infallible known by deconstruction, one must first validate that known source beyond any doubt, scientifically. In such validation there may be a clue as to HOW to BEGIN such a deconstruction. Creation Science has ignored the most basic elements of science, one of which is the ability and the NEED to be skeptical. Those who believe they are sceintists for god are not skeptical. Without the ability for skepticism there can be only bias confirmation of anything they propose. Kids are confused enough. Just another good reason to keep religions OUT of primary educational settings.

boo2u Joined Mon 11/24/08 Posts: 5249	Thu 01/15/09 06:46 PM
The church has for a while not worried they are losing people. What better way to attract new generations than to manufacture what they need to get more attendance. Ah but wait, WAR, that works quite well to get people headed back to religion. Isn't it always the way. Fear has worked since the beginning of man.

Bushidobillyclub Joined Fri 05/11/07 Posts: 5689	Thu 01/15/09 09:12 PM Edited by Bushidobillyclub on Thu 01/15/09 09:17 PM
Good and Evil, you judge too quickly. I believe he still would have to die for your sins. Yes then you killed him, so why blame the Jews or blame the Romans, why don't you blame it on the BossaNova? How about taking some responsibility for our actions? If the Romans or the Jews (whoever) did not condemn and nail Christ to a pole then no Christian would have a path to salvation today. The entire foundation of the religion would have fallen out. You should be thanking the Romans/Jews. Right so I guess Judas Iscariot is really a hero . . . People like Dr. Jason Lisle almost convince me that there really is a devil and he truly can possess people Well, I agree more with skeptical science. Scientists begin with an idea, and then gather everything they know in relation to that idea. And using theories and hypotheses, they attemt to find more specific information that might be turned into more knowledge. Creation science begins with their concept that "here are all the answers" but how do we fit all the pieces to come up with the answer? Bad science! What is the purpose of such science? If one already has the answer they seek, than any sceince from that point of reference is deconstruction and there is no possible way to ever know if or what steps might be missing in theories of such thought. Attempting to get from a perceived infallible known by deconstruction, one must first validate that known source beyond any doubt, scientifically. In such validation there may be a clue as to HOW to BEGIN such a deconstruction. Creation Science has ignored the most basic elements of science, one of which is the ability and the NEED to be skeptical. Those who believe they are sceintists for god are not skeptical. Without the ability for skepticism there can be only bias confirmation of anything they propose. Kids are confused enough. Just another good reason to keep religions OUT of primary educational settings. I am a firm believer that this kind of "science" ie creation science is not science at all but the flailing death throes of an ideology of ignorance and mind control.

splendidlife Joined Fri 03/21/08 Posts: 1171	Thu 01/15/09 09:52 PM
Ok then, some of you might know this one: a theological discussion about Xianity (if we can let the other b/s aside). How do you answer the following: Who killed Jesus? Remember, you can not answer with history, but only theological explanations. Hint: If no one ever existed in all time, eternity and the whole universe but you and only you, would Jesus have to die? BTW, I note you did not answer the question posed. Who killed Jesus? Obvious answer: The Jews. As we have already seen, pointing the finger in ANY direction just begins the same old, all too familiar song and dance. Other humans killed him. Does it really have to have any greater meaning? Since I don't believe that Jesus "died" for my sins or anyone else's, for that matter (if I go by your rules), can I actually participate any further and answer your question? By saying it MUST be a Theological discussion, I suspect you exclude many people with valuable input whose otherwise non-Christian Biblical interpretations would be immediately scoffed at (perhaps my perception is off). Oh well... Here I go anyway (but, I anticipate hating myself in the morning ). Saying that to eat of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil would surely result in death obviously (as history has shown) did NOT mean physical death. What did God mean, then? Could this "Knowledge of Good and Evil" represent the human condition (vs. the ease of all already known experience of our higher selves) of judging self and others and the subsequent suffering it can create be the lesson we were purposed to come here for in the first place? Are we not ALL fallen angels who have eaten of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil simply by virtue of being human? Jesus was willing to lay down his life for the truth as was "shown" to him. How does his death make anyone else's journey on Earth any less painful or challenging? We all "sin" and we all ultimately come to terms with it at our time of exit (with hope, perhaps sooner). Many demand that we all step in line and see it singularly. I will not. Why so serious? It was for the Xians who appear to frequently not have a grasp on their own theology. "Why so serious?" Translation: Your words (Splendidlife) add no value to this conversation. So, I won't even acknowledge any of what you actually said and move on to the point of proving the Xians wrong... NEXT Perhaps today I feel particularly "serious" because my own journey as of late has been quite rocky.