Was Jesus Christ just a man? Aetheists vs. Christians, Battle Royale

the question proposed in the OP is by and large irrelevent.
hell and heaven are irrational concepts and, along with righteousness, sin, and original sin, they form a defect in the minds of humans exposed to them.

the dead sea scrolls revealed that the cult that was responsible for the belief system of christianity, the zaddakim, were hell bent on war and destruction. they were a threat to both jewish and roman civilization, neither would tolerate their views. we call them zionists today.

many sects of higher learning fought against this salvationist system when it was it was being formed.
they understood how the human conciousness is put together and they knew this would cause total destruction of civilization.

does revelations not confirm this?

back on topic...
there were many traveling philosophers (bulls# artists) in 'judea' at the time, all trying to get their belief system written into the 'universal religion' after the plan to create it became obvious.

none were named jesus.

reply to post by terriblyvexed


Every effect must have a cause. A philosophical truth that cannot be denied without denying logic. If every effect must have a cause, then there must be a first cause that cannot at the same time be an effect, which means it must be an eternal cause. It must be intelligent to create rational order and integrity in a universe that is clearly, in the words of Carl Sagan, cosmos and not chaos.

If that first cause is eternal and intelligent, and has no cause before it, it must have superior ontological status that would make it God. The First Cause, by logic, must be God. It can be said in this simple way: If anything exists, God exists.

I can't show you a pink elephant on planet Flurkznack, but that doesn't mean pink elephants or the planet Flurkznack don't exist. However, I can't prove them, nor rationally deduce their existence. I can, however, prove God through rational deduction.

Herbert Spencer, not a Christian, who was hailed as one of the greatest scientists of all time, discovered the categories of the knowable. Everything that exists fits into one of five categories: Space, Time, Matter, and Force

Alright. Well, the Bible told us that way before Spencer did. Don't believe me? It says so at the very beginning of the Book of Genesis.

In the beginning (time)
God (force)
created (action)
the heavens (space)
and earth (matter)

Hm. I guess the Bible is a little clearer on our understanding of reality far more than unbelievers want to believe it does. While the texts of other religions are filled with wild and unpossible scientific theories, all science claimed in the Bible is demonstrable by science (ex. The Bible tells us that the Earth is round and spins on an axis).

The fact remains: God is real, the Bible is the Logos, is eternal and without error, and Jesus has risen. All of these can be demonstrated through rational deduction.

Unless you're a relativist, which in that case, you'll be dead in less than 24 hours by clinging onto that personal philosophy.

reply to post by jiggerj


It's not that you don't "have to have Jesus proven to you" that's the issue. You don't WANT Jesus proven to you, because if and when He is proven to have risen, that means Jesus is God, and that God exists, and that the Bible is true, and if all of those are correct, then you will have to answer for your life.

Oh, and saying to God "I wasn't able to know you existed" or "I wasn't able to know if Jesus is my Savior" won't work, I'm afraid.

reply to post by Spawn2001


You don't have to be lost on Scripture. There are a lot of good translations and various Bible studies that can help you out. I suggest anything of the Reformed category, since it most closely resembles classic Christianity and relies solely on Scripture (as opposed to, say, Roman Catholics, who rely on Scripture and tradition).

reply to post by Spawn2001


I'm not a Christian, though I was raised in the Christian Church. I fell away from the path by the time I was old enough to drive, for reasons which are frankly irrelevant at this point. Needless to say, the first response to your thread sums up my principal argument nicely. I was an atheist for many years, but as I have grown older my stance has mellowed to that of a soft-agnostic. I've seen enough and experienced enough that I can believe there might have been / might be a creator, and I remain unconvinced that ANY earthly religion has ever done the concept justice.

That said -- if all you ever read of the Bible is Revelations, you are missing some of the best parts. Just my opinion; take it or leave it.

As far as Revelations goes, or your place in it, I'll just say this: Do you know the feeling when you are young and powerless and you witness an injustice? Afterwards, you fantasize what you would have done had you been stronger / less afraid / more confident. That's what the Book of Revelation is to me. The revenge fantasy of one man who lived through early Christian persecution in Rome and wanted to see the empire fall.

reply to post by FollowTheWhiteRabbit

Scripture tells us that Jesus performed many gifts of the Spirit and miracles.

Scriptures that were written long after Jesus was dead and buried.

He made prophecies, walked on water, made the blind see, and best of all, successfully prophesied the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 A.D..

These accounts were written long after 70 A.D.

He would come back in spirit. But He didn't. He said He would come back in body.

Written long after Jesus was dead and buried.

Considering the five hundred witnesses including the apostles

When was this written?

So here we have a man named Jesus who said He was the both man and God, who said He would be imprisoned, tortured, and killed, who said He would be raised from the dead in physical form, all in totally public statements to multiple people.

You read this in religious texts that were written long after said people were dead and buried.

Those same people, among many, many others, saw that His tomb was empty, didn't know where He went (thinking that His body was stolen), only to see that He had been raised from the dead. Those same people who were first hand witnesses to His Resurrection would later go on and risk their own lives for the sake of teaching His Gospel.

You read this in religious texts that were written long after said people were dead and buried.

I could go on and on like this. Just as 2000 years from now, if people took the Chronicles of Narnia as real they would be relying on something without any rational validation whatsoever.

A book says Jesus walked on water. Just because it is written doesn't make it true.

You are using the fallacy of misplaced concreteness. Your perception of this reality is based on opposites and lower axioms of truth. Above, there are higher axioms of truth that unify paradox and contradiction below. Apart from knowing the excluded middle, we cannot make if / then statements that presume our own laws and sense of reality. Then, we cannot know, right? Not the case. Our own lower axioms imply higher axioms that are not yet know, but reasonably inferred. God cannot be limited by the same laws he uses to limit others. God follows His laws, true, but law is only a restriction for the one who is restricted. Our own sense of the reality we occupy is bound by our ability to collapse the indeterminate we know. God is determined ahead of what we conceive as indeterminate. Collapsing wave function in physics is the clue we need to infer that time keeps what is determined from happening at once. God, on the other hand, is sovereign beyond our ability to collapse the same wave function. In other words, we are not where he is because time/space is one thing. Matter/energy are one thing and they are only relative to each other by our own frame of reference. Your reasoning excludes the middle of the argument and assume concreteness from one part of the whole.

You are inferring that the future has not already happened. I infer that time keeps things from happening at once by our own perspectives. We are here learning. At the same time, we are unaware of the future, but God has already been there.

Originally posted by FollowTheWhiteRabbit
reply to post by EnochWasRight

 

First, you're assuming evil has ontological status. Evil is not a "thing". Evil is that which is not good (that which isn't Godly is not good, therefore evil).

Secondly, if God is Sovereign, then all things are predestined and there is no free will. If there is free will, then God is not Sovereign and Scripture is wrong. If God is Sovereign and there is no free will, then God has predestined some to be inclined towards evil, and some of us to be inclined toward good. Therefore, God can still prevent evil, retain his omnipotent and benevolent states, and it would end the "problem of evil."

But it's much easier to understand than that: I'm a filthy sinner. You're a filthy sinner. We won't deserve to LIVE, much less have an easy life without evil. To suggest that we DESERVE to live in a nice, happy, fluffy world of bright colors and cute bunnies is a slap in the face of God, to whom we are far, far, far from equal to in importance and knowledge.

reply to post by tinhattribunal


Hell and Heaven are not irrational concepts. Are the choices "innocent" or "guilty" irrational choices by a judge? Of course not. You would expect a judge to do just that: Judge a person as innocent or guilty. To say that Hell and Heaven are irrational, is saying God is irrational for making them and putting evidence of their existence in sacred Scripture. Righteousness and sin are not "defects" in the minds of humans. The only defect is man himself, flawed and filthy with original sin. None can truly know righteousness, because none are without sin. We will all be judged and treated the same: Some will live eternally in the glorious presence of the Almighty, some will not. Those that will not, will have wished they took Scripture more seriously.

reply to post by FollowTheWhiteRabbit

the Bible is true

Sorry. The bible is pure illogical, contradictory crap written by man. It wouldn't even be published today because of all the flaws in the plots.

reply to post by FollowTheWhiteRabbit


I don't know. It seems pretty simple to cloak a lie in a little nationalism or sense of group think to attract followers willing to die for it. Governments do it all the time. All you have to do is wave a little flag and young men will charge into hell and die to preserve it by the millions.

There is a splinter in the human mind called death and it is fear of death that makes people believe all kinds of things, good and bad about the world. Manipulating that splinter is probably the oldest magic we have.

reply to post by FollowTheWhiteRabbit


This is the first time I've disagreed with you... aside from the Jesus is God thing... but that leads to a whole can of Off topicness...

Hell is not rational... in fact its illogical...

Would a loving Father torture his children or give them opportunity to learn from their mistakes?



:shk:

reply to post by jiggerj


- Using the Scripture directly passed from men who were there that saw Him do these things.

- The Gospel of Mark, one gospel which contained the Mount Olivet Discourse in which Jesus gave these prophecies, is dated sometime between 60-70 AD. In comparison, Matthew's was written either between 80–90 AD or sometime before. The Gospel of Luke was written either in 59 or 60 AD.

- Reread the first answer.

- 1 Corinthians 15, the First Epistle to the Corinthians was most likely written in 54 AD.

- And again, they weren't written "long after", and no matter how many times you say they were doesn't change historical evidence against your claims.

You badly want to believe the Bible isn't true and that Jesus is risen. That's okay. You're in league with billions of other worldly pagans who reject God because of their own crazed desire for autonomy and unaccountability. That's fine. I mean, it's not fine with God, but I don't make those kinds of decisions, do I?

reply to post by jiggerj


Please show me the errors and contradictions in the Bible to support your claims. I'd love to work on my spiritual muscles and rip them apart.

reply to post by 0zzymand0s


Nationalism? Jesus condemned Israel for having fallen so far, and told them that Israel would be destroyed and thrown to the four corners of the world. How's that for nationalism? Perhaps you mean Rome? In that case, the Bible has plenty to say about Rome's filthy practices and pagan idolatry, although Jesus told us to "render what is Caesars unto Caesar." Group think? Do you know how many different denominations and divides in theology there are? Christians have a hard time completely agreeing on doctrines surrounding the fundamentals, and in some cases, some Christians think the fundamentals are in question (but those wouldn't be true believers).

Death? There are far worse things to fear than death.

reply to post by Akragon


Would a judge who does his job throw people into prison? Would you make the claim that he's "unfair" and that prison is illogical?

Originally posted by FollowTheWhiteRabbit
reply to post by Akragon

 

Would a judge who does his job throw people into prison? Would you make the claim that he's "unfair" and that prison is illogical?

Jail/prison is not a furnace built to burn and torture its victims... It is a place for contemplation...

Originally posted by jiggerj
reply to post by FollowTheWhiteRabbit

 

the Bible is true

Sorry. The bible is pure illogical, contradictory crap written by man. It wouldn't even be published today because of all the flaws in the plots.

edit on 5/22/2013 by jiggerj because: (no reason given)

When viewing nature, we see laws that can be observed. When viewing quantum physics, the laws are not yet understood because they do not follow predictable patterns. You are implying the same of the Bible, yet denying it is there as an evident truth. You can reasonably imply this of most any book, but not the Bible. It holds the higher axiom that unifies our lower axioms. Until we get past this with an explanation, it simply follows the same laws as the hidden world we can only imply is there. It has an opposite.

reply to post by FollowTheWhiteRabbit


So you say.

Nevertheless -- manipulating that fear, through nationalism, false-pride, desire for revenge, or greed is easy. Millions have willingly marched to their death. Some even imagined god was on their side while they did. You asked how / why men would die for a faith that wasn't real. I don't know if it is "real" or not, but I know its easy to get people to die for all kinds of reasons. Even in 2013.

Jerusalem is the dwelling place of many Archons.

Originally posted by FollowTheWhiteRabbit
reply to post by terriblyvexed

 

Every effect must have a cause. A philosophical truth that cannot be denied without denying logic. If every effect must have a cause, then there must be a first cause that cannot at the same time be an effect, which means it must be an eternal cause. It must be intelligent to create rational order and integrity in a universe that is clearly, in the words of Carl Sagan, cosmos and not chaos.

If that first cause is eternal and intelligent, and has no cause before it, it must have superior ontological status that would make it God. The First Cause, by logic, must be God. It can be said in this simple way: If anything exists, God exists.

I can't show you a pink elephant on planet Flurkznack, but that doesn't mean pink elephants or the planet Flurkznack don't exist. However, I can't prove them, nor rationally deduce their existence. I can, however, prove God through rational deduction.

Herbert Spencer, not a Christian, who was hailed as one of the greatest scientists of all time, discovered the categories of the knowable. Everything that exists fits into one of five categories: Space, Time, Matter, and Force

Alright. Well, the Bible told us that way before Spencer did. Don't believe me? It says so at the very beginning of the Book of Genesis.

In the beginning (time)
God (force)
created (action)
the heavens (space)
and earth (matter)

Hm. I guess the Bible is a little clearer on our understanding of reality far more than unbelievers want to believe it does. While the texts of other religions are filled with wild and unpossible scientific theories, all science claimed in the Bible is demonstrable by science (ex. The Bible tells us that the Earth is round and spins on an axis).

The fact remains: God is real, the Bible is the Logos, is eternal and without error, and Jesus has risen. All of these can be demonstrated through rational deduction.

Unless you're a relativist, which in that case, you'll be dead in less than 24 hours by clinging onto that personal philosophy.

Ok,I was done I made my argument, and was moving on.

Then you had to go, and say "in the beginning god made heaven and earth"and DARE say that's physics 101!

The Bible is wrote by the hand of man it is not prophetic, accurate, true, and for sure not to be taken as scientific!
Keep your arguments based on your faith at least that has a form of merits, but using your imagination to interpret the meaning of some dead guys word who had no understanding of science just comes off as weak.