Never seen that move. Say the Bible is just like fiction then say you can use it to determine if God is real.
@Lausten God is a word that means mighty and or venerated from a Hebrew root word meaning “strong one; mighty.” Moses was appointed to be God to Aaron and Pharaoh. Satan is the god of the world. Anyone or anything can be a god so long as anyone attributes to it a might greater than their own.
What I was saying is that the unbeliever should look at the Bible exactly as they see it. They don’t need to accept it’s authenticity merely in order to fairly evaluate it and they sure as hell don’t know much more than apostate Christians do about it, generally speaking.
But really, the conflict between the militant atheist and the fundamental Christian is a class struggle more than a theological one.
I spent 3 years working through the entire Lectionary. I took lay leadership classes. I’ve been on 2 mission trips and I’ve been a Sunday School teacher. I think you may have come in here thinking you are dealing with lightweights.
David Leon said,No, I didn’t say that. I was referring to zombies. Jesus was most certainly dead when he was entombed
Then explain to me how it is that Jesus could be physically resurrected, and please don’t bore me with the few minutes grace before the human brain dies and the body begins to decompose. Jesus was a human, subject to physical injury just like any other human, no?
If not, how can you claim that Jesus was in fact dead when was entombed (not buried). I read that his body was recovered and buried as was the custom in those days. That sounds considerable more believable to me than you account of a dead human miraculously rising from the dead unscathed by bacterial virulence.
You do realize that when the human biome dies, its bacterial population begins to devour the body almost immediately? That how we know you’re dead, the smell of “decaying flesh”.
David leon said,Jesus existed in heaven as a spirit, Michael, prior to coming to earth as a man. He gave his body as a ransom sacrifice, once and for all time. That body was taken away by the angels who were near the tomb afterwards. So, when he appeared again to his disciples some of them mistook him for a gardener, like would be taking care of the area.
W4Usaid,
What happened to Joseph and Mary and the birth of Jesus in the manger?
And the carpentry?
DL said,Well, by then Joseph was long dead. It was the practice then for a man to marry at about the age of 32 to a maiden or young girl at about 14 or 15, so he was much older and had died. Mary was taken care of by John and probably family.
Do you even know what I am talking about, or is another evasion or obfuscation of a direct question as is the case with almost all questions relating to mythology being represented as fact?
If Jesus was in fact dead after the crucifixion and taken from the tomb to heaven by angels, how could he possible have been physically resurrected as a gardner?
So you now maintain that Jesus was not resurrected, but reborn as a fully formed male, posing as a gardner?
And if Mary was the first female to give birth to Jesus, and Joseph had died, who then was the second father and mother to deliver a fully formed human male Jesus after his spirit had descended from heaven back to earth? ADAM 102?
onsidering that your OP asks “Please Help Me Continue to Examine Why I Believe Jesus Rose Bodily from the Dead” you seem to have strayed from your own proposition. So, who is the deceiver here?
Wow, just trying to make sense of the chronology makes my head spin. But of course that is the intent of religion, miracles happen and science is the work of the devil.
I spent 3 years working through the entire Lectionary. I took lay leadership classes. I’ve been on 2 mission trips and I’ve been a Sunday School teacher.My condolences. I'm far more ignorant than the average atheist when it comes to Christian and Jewish terminology. Just looking briefly at the term Lectionary kind of - well, I don't know how else to say this but it justifies my avoidance of such terms. Uh, you know, I've talked to Hebrew professors in Israel and personally find them to be about half as informed as, let's say, the average JW 8 year old child when it comes to the Bible, so . . . in over a quarter of a century of online discussion of the Bible the most informed person I've come across, by far, was an English atheist who was a history buff. Though we rarely agreed I so thoroughly enjoyed discussing the Bible with him. He challenged me and we enjoyed learning from each other. It sort of flipped my perspective in a way I couldn't have managed on my own.
What I find unique about you is your particular mix of science and Christianity. That in itself isn’t unique for unbelievers but you seem to have a unique approach judging by your blog.
onsidering that your OP asks “Please Help Me Continue to Examine Why I Believe Jesus Rose Bodily from the Dead” you seem to have strayed from your own proposition.Just to keep things on track. SethWJ started the thread. It's been taking over by this new discussion.
Then explain to me how it is that Jesus could be physically resurrected, and please don’t bore me with the few minutes grace before the human brain dies and the body begins to decompose. Jesus was a human, subject to physical injury just like any other human, no?Yes. I don't know what you mean by "few minutes grace" but, well, are you familiar with the Nephilim? Angels can come down to earth and take human form. When Jesus was born he did that at birth. Came from heaven as a spirit creature, was born and lived until being put to death. At that point his body was decomposing. Meanwhile, his spirit form went to the abyss for 3 days. Then, his spirit form took the form of another man, similar in appearance to his former self, but not the same body. I realize this sounds ridiculous to you, I'm just telling you what the Bible says.
If not, how can you claim that Jesus was in fact dead when was entombed (not buried). I read that his body was recovered and buried as was the custom in those days. That sounds considerable more believable to me than you account of a dead human miraculously rising from the dead unscathed by bacterial virulence.You do realize that when the human biome dies, its bacterial population begins to devour the body almost immediately? That how we know you’re dead, the smell of “decaying flesh”.
Okay, I’m not familiar with that custom, it sounds odd to me. He was dead. His body decomposing.
What happened to Joseph and Mary and the birth of Jesus in the manger?What do you mean what happened? You've read the account? No surprises there. It is what it says.
And the carpentry?It stopped? He was finished with that when he took up his ministry.
Do you even know what I am talking about, or is another evasion or obfuscation of a direct question as is the case with almost all questions relating to mythology being represented as fact?I don't know what you want from me. I'd like to help you but you don't seem to be paying attention to what I'm writing. Maybe you expect some answer other than the one I'm giving. Jesus' body was dead. Worm food.
If Jesus was in fact dead after the crucifixion and taken from the tomb to heaven by angels, how could he possible have been physically resurrected as a gardner?He was dead, his body taken to the tomb, then taken away by the angels, like Moses. For the same reason as Moses. They didn't want them to make an idol out of his remains. A place of worship at his tomb. They didn't take him to heaven because the Bible says that flesh and blood can't enter heaven. As I explained, I think in this thread, excuse me if I'm mistaken on that, but angels from Genesis to Revelation have taken on the forms of men. So, they are in spirit form in heaven, then come to earth and take on the form of men. I gave examples. Sorry if I bored you. So Jesus did that at birth, lived to be a 33 1/2 year old man, died on the stake, his body placed in the tomb, angels carried it away. Meanwhile, in his previous spirit form he went to what is called the abyss. The word just means deep. Satan is going to be put there for 1,000 years, according to Revelation. After 3 days (specifically parts of 3 days) he returns to earth briefly in the form of another body. Then he ascends to heaven, abandoning that body as angels do, returning to heaven in spirit form.
So you now maintain that Jesus was not resurrected, but reborn as a fully formed male, posing as a gardner?Not posing as a gardener, mistaken to have been a gardener.
And if Mary was the first female to give birth to Jesus, and Joseph had died, who then was the second father and mother to deliver a fully formed human male Jesus after his spirit had descended from heaven back to earth? ADAM 102?I don't get the ADAM 102 reference, but no. Jesus didn't need to be born in physical form a second time. Jesus doesn't need to return. His sacrifice was paid in full. So, really, in effect, his new form wasn't actually Jesus. Just as all of the examples of him having came to earth prior to being born as Jesus weren't actually Jesus. See, there's Michael in heaven, in spirit. He had come as a representative of Jehovah on numerous occasions prior to being born as Jesus. Hanging out with Adam, Lot, Abraham, wrestling with Jacob.
Considering that your OP asks “Please Help Me Continue to Examine Why I Believe Jesus Rose Bodily from the Dead” you seem to have strayed from your own proposition. So, who is the deceiver here?You've mistaken me for posting the OP. I do that all the time, I can't keep up with it. It wasn't me.
Wow, just trying to make sense of the chronology makes my head spin. But of course that is the intent of religion, miracles happen and science is the work of the devil.Science isn't the work of the devil. I was just giving Tim a hard time. I was actually trying to make a point but he didn't call me on it. Science, like theology, religion, politics etc. is nothing more than the imperfect musings of mankind.
It actually makes sense when you get to know the big picture but you have to put all the pieces together like a puzzle. It’s just important not to mix in the pieces of another puzzle, the pagan influence of apostate Jewish and Christian teachings.
The Bible can be summed up, from Genesis to Revelation, as being about the vindication of Jehovah God’s name through the ransom sacrifice of Christ Jesus. You are probably not interested, but I explain it very briefly in the synapses on Pathway Machine. I’ve sort of incorporated the explanation in an unfinished fictional illustration I’m working on but that is only a few words into it and then the explanation. It would probably help you a great deal in understanding the Bible without all of the lexical semantics.
Well David, you’ve successfully thrown so much out there, you can now leave behind what you choose and avoid any real dialog. If I don’t respond much in the next few days, it’s because I’m bored with this. Most of us who post regularly here are familiar with the Jesus story.
@Lausten Steve Wells, the originator of the Skeptic’s Annotated Bible (SAB) also had a blog at one time. It’s still there, but no longer active. Mr. Wells started the SAB because he felt his family had been hijacked by Jehovah’s Witnesses. His wife and kids became JW. So, I’m fortunate to have been influenced by the JWs (Watchtower) and was posting on his forum and he invited me over to his blog. He told me he needed a believer’s perspective, a different opinion.
When I got there he almost immediately told his readers that I should be ignored. That he was going to ignore me and suggested everyone else do the same. I guess it was too much for him. The SAB isn’t an academic approach to Biblical criticism by any means. I don’t know, maybe my answers hit too close to home.
I have to say, I see your repeatedly dismissing me as peculiar in the same way. I was answering questions. If you or any other readers want to ignore me just do it. Don’t keep announcing it. That’s a pretty effective way to get rid of me without banning me. If your not interested there’s nothing more effective than non participation. Any other thing, to me, seems like protesting too much. Don’t you think that is intellectually dishonest?
I have my understanding and I’d like to share it with you. I’d like for you to share yours with me.
I’m not going to respond to details about what Jesus did. I don’t know what you think I said that was intellectually dishonest. But I’m not going to give long explanations of things I consider pretty well known. Sorry if that’s dismissive.
@Lausten Okay. Fair enough. I’m not going to comment on science because it’s pretty well known. I better hurry up over to the Science forum and announce my intentions to ignore them. That’ll show 'em!
David leon said,Science isn’t the work of the devil. I was just giving Tim a hard time. I was actually trying to make a point but he didn’t call me on it. Science, like theology, religion, politics etc. is nothing more than the imperfect musings of mankind.
Really, and you feel qualified to make that observation and not be called a fool? Are you making imperfect musings? You sound pretty sure of yourself.
It actually makes sense when you get to know the big picture but you have to put all the pieces together like a puzzle. It’s just important not to mix in the pieces of another puzzle, the pagan influence of apostate Jewish and Christian teachings.Ah, so not all religions are the true religions and their adherents are apostate pagans? And as you have already indicated, adherents of science fall in that same category. And of course, if one is able to put all the pieces of the puzzle together as you have so ably done (almost as good as scientists do everyday), enlightenment shall surely follow.
What shall we do with all these poor deluded souls who don’t do puzzles? Declare a Fatwah?
Your hubris seems to have no bounds. Jesus was a Nephelem, sure…that’s a new slant to the mythology. I’m done with you… have a nice life.
@Write4U No religion has ever remained true, even to itself. The Jews with Jehovah among them rejected him repeatedly until he finally rejected them. They nailed the messiah they had waited for thousands of years for to a tree. The Christians adopted outside teachings contrary to their own and distorted his teachings beyond recognition. Just as Paul said they would. (2 Timothy 4:4) Li Erh’s Taoist concept of leaving behind the social and political world for a simple approach to nature became superstitious priests for hire to bless supermarkets. The Shintoists thought their kiamikaze (divine wind) would lead them to take over the world but they abandoned it after Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Siddhārtha Gautama tried to create a path away from the complex metaphysical trappings of Hinduism but his path exceeded those trappings. Muhammad’s peace turned into war mongering that would astonish his Quraysh tribal chiefs and the Hindus’ Mother Ganga (Ganges River) - the Milky Way - descended from heaven and became a foul stinking cesspool; it’s people trapped in a caste system and bad karma.
Given the history, what enlightenment do you think I would possibly seek?
There’s nothing wrong with the origins of any of these paths, but oh, when they are trampled underfoot by the hordes they take on a life of their own.
If I were a diesel mechanic and I came across a website who’s visitors brought it upon themselves to belittle my profession I would laugh and shrug it off or just scratch my head. Your emotional reaction to my dismissal of science screams religiosity. Science to me is no more relevant than diesel mechanics. Neither good nor bad . . . but out there . . . in the world . . . there is a small religious spark looking to replace one so called enlightenment with another and the real danger in this is that they don’t have the insight or foresight to even see it though everyone around them can see it.
Take a breather. Do some thinking on your own. Have a laugh.
Your emotional reaction to my dismissal of science screams religiosity.I think you are reading a lot in to our posts that isn't there David.
Given the history, what enlightenment do you think I would possibly seek?There’s nothing wrong with the origins of any of these paths, but oh, when they are trampled underfoot by the hordes they take on a life of their own.
You seem to be aware of how gurus and false prophets abuse the wisdom seekers in the second sentence here, but then why would you need to ask the question? You are walking some sort of knife edge where you can deconstruct any claimer of “enlightenment” out there, but you also have some version of your own. Somehow you figured out that your version of Christianity is correct.
I think you are reading a lot in to our posts that isn’t there David.That certainly is a possibility. I've been doing this a long time and I have come to expect certain things. I think the same may apply to anyone debating me. It's just a natural reaction. I try to watch out for it but you need a reflection to see yourself, so let me know when you (the readers) think I may be doing that and I will do the same.
You seem to be aware of how gurus and false prophets abuse the wisdom seekers in the second sentence here, but then why would you need to ask the question?Good question, because I think I tend to see things differently than most at least to some extent. I see the corruption of mankind being remarkably similar whether it be politics, society or religion and even expanding that to include entertainment, art, sports, music. It's about worldview. The motivation to any effort en masse becoming a tool which is misused or misapplied. A soccer riot, fashion dictations, music snobs, etc. To me, the solution is avoid group think. Beware the tribe.
You are walking some sort of knife edge where you can deconstruct any claimer of “enlightenment” out there, but you also have some version of your own.Enlightenment is a personal experience or responsibility from my perspective. Everything I write is an opinion or a starting point for the reader's own discretion. Of course I don't have to remind anyone of that unless I amass a huge following which I wouldn't do for the potential of the aforementioned abuse and misapplication. So you are exactly right - some version of my own. I share you can take it and do with it what you will. Spit on it, trample on it, flush it. But, don't forget, this is a discussion forum where debate takes place. I'm not here to make friends or enemies. I'm here to exchange ideas. To teach and to learn.
Somehow you figured out that your version of Christianity is correct.As everyone else here, believer and unbeliever alike have done. We're not going to select the incorrect one in our own estimation are we.
You won’t see me defending the abominations of Christendom, or the my primary influence, the Watchtower; nor will you see me overlooking the possibility of my own personal errors and there have been many and will continue to be many till the day I die. But they are mine alone.
Spit on it, trample on it, flush it.Let's keep that to a minimum.
Let's keep that to a minimum.Okay, but I didn't mean it facetiously. I mean literally that it is up to the reader and makes no difference to me. If you give someone something; money, advice, information, data, wisdom etc. it's theirs to do with it what they wish.
Hello to all responding in this Forum.
I am very grateful to see that there are over 70 posted comments.
I just want to say thank you for the discussion.
Also, want to beg your patience in my contributions and replies. We are experiencing some medical concerns in our family that are very time consuming at the moment. I look forward to seeing every comment and replying in time. Thank you!! Seth W-T
My last post to you,
David leon said,Given the history, what enlightenment do you think I would possibly seek?
Apparently none.
In all these posts have you demonstrated any useful knowledge at all except stroking your own ego about the interpretation of already discredited scripture?.
Might as well reinterpret Aesops fables, no difference. The current new religious fable is named “Of Pandas and People”
