Jesus said...

Sermon on the Mount

Abrahamic religion, you know, the one with the cross...

Moderators: Blip, DarthHelmet86

Re: Jesus said...

#121  Postby jinxu » Apr 02, 2015 5:20 pm

Alan B wrote:
jinxu wrote:I might be being overly sensitive, and if so let me know. Just seems like threads such as these are bait or traps laid out. Reading through the bulk of the posts (haven't read all of them honestly) I am left with a few questions :

1) Why ask for my opinion knowing that I will answer from a point of belief? Of course I cannot provide acceptable evidence of my belief, it is my belief. If I could PROVE my belief, then it'd be your belief as well.

The original question was not asking for 'proof' (by that I presume you mean 'evidence') of any belief. Of the some 41,000 Christian sects there are probably 41,000 different interpretations - in which the idea of a single universal interpretation cancels out.
2) Why bring verses of the Bible into the discussion if you don't believe that the Bible is the word of God? For that matter why ask about any verse in the Bible and it's application or interpretation when you don't believe in God or the Bible?

The Bible is the word of humans and written down by humans some of whom were gullible enough to think a 'god' was 'speaking' to them. I ask about the interpretation of statements in the Bible because I can not because I have or have not a belief in a god or the writings in the Bible.
3) I know many here are former theists of one variety or another. And that many gave up their faith based on critical thinking. But when going back to any holy text do you ever put yourself back into the shoes of the current believers? This last question doesn't really have anything to do with the topic and you can choose to disregard if you like.

It would be impossible to put myself in the shoes of the millions of believers in the, er, 41,000 sects... And anyway, each person will have their own version which will be different from the next person - that is the nature of belief.

Please read the whole thread to get a better idea of the comments.


I understand the orignal question. That's why answered it on a different post.

My main point in this post is why ask us for our opinion when it will only get turned right back on its head when it gets pointed out that our opinion is rubbish because it is only our opinion? I will not speak for all Christians (and they probably thank me for it) but when asked about the Bible / God / Jesus my answers will most likely come from either personal experience or the Bible itself.
jinxu
 
Posts: 180

United States (us)
Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: Jesus said...

#122  Postby Alan B » Apr 02, 2015 7:08 pm

jinxu wrote:Yes, different translations. Yes, it is from Matthew. As I stated, the NLT version words it to better express how I believe it to mean.

Each to his own, I suppose. For me the 'in spirit' bit is essential to separate the SotM from the so-called 'Plains' version in Luke. I don't think the two 'teachings' can be combined because they were meant for different audiences.

Indeed, the wealthy can be humble and the poor can be arrogant. So when I put both Matthew and Luke together I understand it as both materially poor and also humble.

See above.
I guess it would be more correct to say that Jesus was the fulfillment of the law. The law laid down both consequences and rewards for obeying the law. So Jesus both fulfilled the requirements of the penalty (death) and provided us the rewards (life / blessings / etc).

There again. What 'Law'? Did this Jesus actually mention what 'Law' he was fulfilling. I must confess that I haven't researched that at all. I am taking the SotM in isolation, away from external commentary on its meaning and Jesus' 'purpose'.

Please explain further. I don't understand what is rubbish. My statement or that God wrote on the stone tablets?

I object to the notion that a supernatural mythical 'being' actually interfaces with the material world. Moses wrote it all and thought it all up - end of story!

Indeed, so often in fact that we say "human error" and other such cliches and phrases. But I maintain (with no proof, I know) that the message remains true because it was inspired by God.

Well, again, each to his own, I suppose.
I have NO BELIEF in the existence of a God or gods. I do not have to offer evidence nor do I have to determine absence of evidence because I do not ASSERT that a God does or does not or gods do or do not exist.
User avatar
Alan B
THREAD STARTER
 
Posts: 9999
Age: 84
Male

Country: UK (Birmingham)
United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: Jesus said...

#123  Postby Alan B » Apr 02, 2015 7:31 pm

jinxu wrote:I understand the orignal question. That's why answered it on a different post.

My main point in this post is why ask us for our opinion when it will only get turned right back on its head when it gets pointed out that our opinion is rubbish because it is only our opinion? I will not speak for all Christians (and they probably thank me for it) but when asked about the Bible / God / Jesus my answers will most likely come from either personal experience or the Bible itself.

There are many different opinions on the SotM offered by theists which will be criticised by other theists. Each of them has an axe to grind in favour of their perceived true version of their religion.
Any atheist criticism will be directed at theists who can't make their mind up about which words to put into 'God's mouth', i.e. the umpteen different versions of the Bible.
I have NO BELIEF in the existence of a God or gods. I do not have to offer evidence nor do I have to determine absence of evidence because I do not ASSERT that a God does or does not or gods do or do not exist.
User avatar
Alan B
THREAD STARTER
 
Posts: 9999
Age: 84
Male

Country: UK (Birmingham)
United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: Jesus said...

#124  Postby jinxu » Apr 02, 2015 7:59 pm

Each to his own, I suppose. For me the 'in spirit' bit is essential to separate the SotM from the so-called 'Plains' version in Luke. I don't think the two 'teachings' can be combined because they were meant for different audiences.


For me, it works combined. But in terms of original audience I agree. Matthew speaking to the Jews (who were under oppression from Romans) could've presented it as poor in spirit. Where as Luke's audience of mainly Greeks (some or many that were affluent) probably presented it as simply poor, as in material wealth.

There again. What 'Law'? Did this Jesus actually mention what 'Law' he was fulfilling. I must confess that I haven't researched that at all. I am taking the SotM in isolation, away from external commentary on its meaning and Jesus' 'purpose'.


My apologies in bringing up the Law without any context. It is just that much of the SotM deals with Jesus' views on the OT laws, especially in Matthew's account. Much of the "fulfillment of the Law" actually comes from the apostle Paul in his various writings. And as such I guess it has no bearing on the current discussion of the Beatitudes from the SotM.

I object to the notion that a supernatural mythical 'being' actually interfaces with the material world. Moses wrote it all and thought it all up - end of story!


I was simply stating what is written in the Bible. Moses received the stone tablets directly from God. My only question is were they just the original Ten Commandments or all the various laws. I am personally leaning towards just the Ten Commandments because Jesus when asked about divorce said that the law governing divorce was from Moses.

As to the objection regarding a mythical being actually interfacing with the material world; as you say - to each his own.
jinxu
 
Posts: 180

United States (us)
Print view this post

Re: Jesus said...

#125  Postby jinxu » Apr 02, 2015 8:18 pm

Alan B wrote:
jinxu wrote:I understand the orignal question. That's why answered it on a different post.

My main point in this post is why ask us for our opinion when it will only get turned right back on its head when it gets pointed out that our opinion is rubbish because it is only our opinion? I will not speak for all Christians (and they probably thank me for it) but when asked about the Bible / God / Jesus my answers will most likely come from either personal experience or the Bible itself.

There are many different opinions on the SotM offered by theists which will be criticised by other theists. Each of them has an axe to grind in favour of their perceived true version of their religion.
Any atheist criticism will be directed at theists who can't make their mind up about which words to put into 'God's mouth', i.e. the umpteen different versions of the Bible.


Fair enough. My only point is that when most theists discuss or criticize each other both sides, for the most part, still accept that the Bible is from God. They are arguing whose interpretation is correct. When theists argue about the Bible they point out different sections of the Bible to support their claims. Of course there are more liberal theists who simply think of the Bible as a book of morals and ethics. And simply like to zero in on the nice parts and preach on it. They are also more open to using other sources to preach with.

Whereas, obviously, an atheist would disagree on the grounds that the Bible is just a book. So pointing out other verses is pointless. Because what is the point of bringing up verses from a book atheists view as ridiculous? Then sprinkle in some of the more anti-religion atheists and the discussion between theist and atheists turns south rather quickly.
jinxu
 
Posts: 180

United States (us)
Print view this post

Re: Jesus said...

#126  Postby Skinny Puppy » Apr 03, 2015 5:33 am

I’m playing mafia right now Alan, so I don’t have the time to get back into this thread right now, but I’ll address one point.

Jinxu wrote:
Matthew's audience were Jews so the relevance to the OT would be more profound to them. As someone mentioned Jesus' claim was that he came to fulfill the Law.

Alan B wrote:
Fulfil what Law, precisely? Would this be The Ten Commandments or the similar teachings of earlier prophets?

That has so many answers and in some cases it isn’t answered. However, an analogy works well to explain it.

You buy a house and take out a mortgage from the bank. You are now under a set of legal rules that you must follow to the letter. Make your payments on time; pay off the entire amount etc.

During that period of time you cannot deviate from any of your obligations without consent from the bank and through a mutual agreement. Now finally you pay off the mortgage and you are free from the bank’s influence and demands and the house is yours.

The agreement that you had with the bank is still a legal document, but you’ve ‘fulfilled’ your obligations to it. That isn’t to say that the agreement you had with the bank was wrong or bad, it simply means that the ownership of the house has passed from the bank to you.

So what Jesus was saying is this: The old laws (all of them) were valid previous to His coming, but like a mortgage, he paid the debt and now you are no longer under obligation to the old laws. He has fulfilled their requirements and is the new owner of the house.

That’s why is said He didn’t come to change the law, because those laws were valid up until his arrival, however, He has now fulfilled all of the requirements of the old laws. That’s why we don’t burn witches anymore, have animal sacrifices etc.

He then gave us a new set of laws (in a sense, they’re not really laws but the way to reach God and how to act) and it’s His teachings that we follow now, not any of the OT.

To put what He said into plain-speak:
I have not come to change the law; they were valid before I came unto you. However, now you will follow what I teach you and you don’t have to follow the old laws anymore. What I say and will teach you is all that you need to gain the kingdom of heaven and only through me, and me alone, can you get to God. You will now get to God only through me and not by following the law.
User avatar
Skinny Puppy
 
Name: Sherlock Jeffrey Puppy
Posts: 9399
Age: 37
Male

Canada (ca)
Print view this post

Re: Jesus said...

#127  Postby Skinny Puppy » Apr 03, 2015 5:54 am

jinxu wrote:
Alan B wrote:
jinxu wrote:I understand the orignal question. That's why answered it on a different post.

My main point in this post is why ask us for our opinion when it will only get turned right back on its head when it gets pointed out that our opinion is rubbish because it is only our opinion? I will not speak for all Christians (and they probably thank me for it) but when asked about the Bible / God / Jesus my answers will most likely come from either personal experience or the Bible itself.

There are many different opinions on the SotM offered by theists which will be criticised by other theists. Each of them has an axe to grind in favour of their perceived true version of their religion.
Any atheist criticism will be directed at theists who can't make their mind up about which words to put into 'God's mouth', i.e. the umpteen different versions of the Bible.


Fair enough. My only point is that when most theists discuss or criticize each other both sides, for the most part, still accept that the Bible is from God. They are arguing whose interpretation is correct. When theists argue about the Bible they point out different sections of the Bible to support their claims. Of course there are more liberal theists who simply think of the Bible as a book of morals and ethics. And simply like to zero in on the nice parts and preach on it. They are also more open to using other sources to preach with.

Whereas, obviously, an atheist would disagree on the grounds that the Bible is just a book. So pointing out other verses is pointless. Because what is the point of bringing up verses from a book atheists view as ridiculous? Then sprinkle in some of the more anti-religion atheists and the discussion between theist and atheists turns south rather quickly.


If religions were an island most of us wouldn’t care one way or the other. However, the reality is religions have slaughtered and butchered humanity since nigh-on the beginning of civilization. Conform or die is the building block of most religions.

In addition, religious nonsense tries to hamper the advancement of the sciences which are a boon to mankind, they try to hamper the education of our youth by telling them fairy tales and that they’re hell-bound unless ‘every knee shall bow’.

We have every right, no... it’s our obligation to humanity to put an end to this poisonous nonsense that would gladly revert man back to the dark ages in order to serve a psychopathic, so-called loving god.

I live by many rules, but I have one that is apropos.

Puppy says: If you don’t like something or if you disagree with it, know what it is that you don’t like!

That’s one reason atheists study the bible, examine its verses ad infinitum.

And this point I do want to make. If man is evil and a sinner, I can well understand it. We are just the result of evolution and we move up the ladder of understanding and kindness for our fellow man one rung at a time.

What the hell is wrong with God! He’s the master of the universe, yet His brutality puts Hitler, Stalin et al. to bloody shame! The worst human, and I do mean the worst human, that ever lived is still miles above the morality of a God that butchered mankind without mercy on earth and plans to torture them for an eternity.

Thanks, but no thanks; I’ll take mankind’s morality any day over a ‘loving’ God.
User avatar
Skinny Puppy
 
Name: Sherlock Jeffrey Puppy
Posts: 9399
Age: 37
Male

Canada (ca)
Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: Jesus said...

#128  Postby Agrippina » Apr 03, 2015 8:21 am

On the idea that Jesus was allowed to cancel the old laws, because he came to fulfil those laws.

There are two issues. The one is that Jesus is supposed to be "God on earth" in other words, he impregnated Mary with himself, so that he could live incognito among humans and then sacrifice himself to himself so that people who appreciate the sacrifice can be allowed to enter the kingdom of heaven. So this is not Jesus fulfilling the law, but God changing his mind. OK those laws were a little harsh, so I'll just go down there and tell them I didn't really mean what I said when I told them of all manner of horrible things that would befall them if they continued to behave like harlots with the gods of their neighbours: see Deuteronomy 25:15-68. By the way, when the Israelites did disobey the law, he didn't bring down those curses on them, he just sent them out into the world, or to be slaves to the Persians. Not so much of the horrors in Deuteronomy happening to them.

The second issue is that in the giving of that law, the Jews are also told that those laws are in place for all time. They are unchangeable.

Deuteronomy 4:2 Do not add to what I command you and do not subtract from it, but keep the commands of the LORD your God that I give you.
Deuteronomy 12:32 See that you do all I command you; do not add to it or take away from it.
Isaiah 40:8 The grass withereth, the flower fadeth but the word of our God shall stand for ever.
I Peter 1:25 But the word of the Lord endureth for ever...

So this God, who is now called the Father, Son and Holy Ghost, changed his mind. He first realised that those curses in Deuteronomy were a little harsh, and then with allowing himself to live on earth, he became a softie who just told people that they didn't have to stone their kids anymore (Deut 21:18); stone women for touching men's 'secrets', (Deut 23:11); not sleep with other men (Lev 20:13); not enter the temple if they were castrated (Deut 23:1-2); worry about mixing livestock (Lev 19:19); tattoos or surgery (Lev 19:28); sell their daughters as slaves (Ex 21:7); keep women "unclean" after giving birth (Lev 12); stone their wives for adultery (Deut 22:24); no longer be allowed to get divorced (Deut 24), and so on.

Now all they have to do is to apologise to Jesus, then they can get through the gates of heaven.

Except, this isn't true, because it says in the Bible, that only 144,000 men "undefiled by women" (Rev 14) will go there. Not anyone who goes to church, does penance, or whatever their church's version of confession is, says they're sorry and they won't do it again, then go about preaching to people who know better about how sinful they are, but only priests, i.e. the ones who actually keep to their vows of celibacy as far as women are concerned, and only 144,000 of them, will get there. So what's the point?

First this God punishes people for disobeying a law that has a punishment they don't understand, by causing them and their descendants in perpetuity to be branded as criminals forever, unless they worship his reincarnation who undid the laws made subsequently. Then he drowns all of them. including people on the other side of the world, who've never heard of him, and their animals (what's with killing off all the dinosaurs, what the hell did they do?), then he makes them slaves, twice, and puts them under the rule of despots, twice, in their own land, then he remakes himself, undoes all the laws he said he would smite them for breaking, promising to return in their lifetime, (Matt 24:34), and then doesn't keep that promise either.

So why are people still worshipping this lying, fickle, megalomaniacal, misanthropic, misogynistic, child-hating, self-aggrandising, god?
Illegitimi non carborundum
User avatar
Agrippina
 
Posts: 36690
Age: 109
Female

Country: South Africa
South Africa (za)
Print view this post

Re: Jesus said...

#129  Postby Alan B » Apr 03, 2015 10:12 am

Skinny Puppy wrote:I have not come to change the law; they were valid before I came unto you. However, now you will follow what I teach you and you don’t have to follow the old laws anymore. What I say and will teach you is all that you need to gain the kingdom of heaven and only through me, and me alone, can you get to God. You will now get to God only through me and not by following the law.

That makes more sense. If you take 'God' out of the equation, then it could be read as: "I have meditated and found that I have reached a 'mind-state' that allows you to live in spiritual bliss without regard to any mundane Laws or restrictions." Obviously the Temple Elders didn't like this one bit - it threatened to take away their physical power over the gullible. Outside of this concept, any other stories or 'prophesies' (e.g. the 144,000 crap and the OT rubbish) are a nonsensical irrelevance.

Perhaps he reached 'Nirvana'? :scratch: (wooooooo! :lol: )
I have NO BELIEF in the existence of a God or gods. I do not have to offer evidence nor do I have to determine absence of evidence because I do not ASSERT that a God does or does not or gods do or do not exist.
User avatar
Alan B
THREAD STARTER
 
Posts: 9999
Age: 84
Male

Country: UK (Birmingham)
United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: Jesus said...

#130  Postby angelo » Apr 03, 2015 10:55 am

Who was it that said : religion came into being with the first con man. And the first fool.
User avatar
angelo
 
Name: angelo barbato
Posts: 22513
Age: 72
Male

Country: Australia
Australia (au)
Print view this post

Re: Jesus said...

#131  Postby Alan B » Apr 03, 2015 11:00 am

Er, I give in. Who? :lol:
I have NO BELIEF in the existence of a God or gods. I do not have to offer evidence nor do I have to determine absence of evidence because I do not ASSERT that a God does or does not or gods do or do not exist.
User avatar
Alan B
THREAD STARTER
 
Posts: 9999
Age: 84
Male

Country: UK (Birmingham)
United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: Jesus said...

#132  Postby jinxu » Apr 03, 2015 11:03 am

angelo wrote:Who was it that said : religion came into being with the first con man. And the first fool.


It was said by the second con man so as to place blame on the first con man?
jinxu
 
Posts: 180

United States (us)
Print view this post

Re: Jesus said...

#133  Postby Scot Dutchy » Apr 03, 2015 11:03 am

Mark Twain
Myths in islam Women and islam Musilm opinion polls


"Religion is excellent stuff for keeping common people quiet.” — Napoleon Bonaparte
User avatar
Scot Dutchy
 
Posts: 43119
Age: 71
Male

Country: Nederland
European Union (eur)
Print view this post

Re: Jesus said...

#134  Postby jinxu » Apr 03, 2015 2:17 pm

Scot Dutchy wrote:Mark Twain


My point exactly =P. He's also the man who claims that quitting smoking is easy because he does it many times a day :lol: . I love Mark Twain, though I hated that my mom made me read his books in 1st grade.
jinxu
 
Posts: 180

United States (us)
Print view this post

Re: Jesus said...

#135  Postby Skinny Puppy » Apr 03, 2015 6:40 pm

jinxu wrote:
Scot Dutchy wrote:Mark Twain


My point exactly =P. He's also the man who claims that quitting smoking is easy because he does it many times a day :lol: . I love Mark Twain, though I hated that my mom made me read his books in 1st grade.


Have you read Letters From The Earth?

http://www.online-literature.com/twain/letters-from-the-earth/
User avatar
Skinny Puppy
 
Name: Sherlock Jeffrey Puppy
Posts: 9399
Age: 37
Male

Canada (ca)
Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: Jesus said...

#136  Postby jinxu » Apr 03, 2015 6:41 pm

Skinny Puppy wrote:
jinxu wrote:
Scot Dutchy wrote:Mark Twain


My point exactly =P. He's also the man who claims that quitting smoking is easy because he does it many times a day :lol: . I love Mark Twain, though I hated that my mom made me read his books in 1st grade.


Have you read Letters From The Earth?

http://www.online-literature.com/twain/letters-from-the-earth/


In first grade? No.
jinxu
 
Posts: 180

United States (us)
Print view this post

Re: Jesus said...

#137  Postby Skinny Puppy » Apr 03, 2015 6:54 pm

jinxu wrote:
Skinny Puppy wrote:
jinxu wrote:
Scot Dutchy wrote:Mark Twain


My point exactly =P. He's also the man who claims that quitting smoking is easy because he does it many times a day :lol: . I love Mark Twain, though I hated that my mom made me read his books in 1st grade.


Have you read Letters From The Earth?

http://www.online-literature.com/twain/letters-from-the-earth/


In first grade? No.


No, I mean have you read it at any time?
User avatar
Skinny Puppy
 
Name: Sherlock Jeffrey Puppy
Posts: 9399
Age: 37
Male

Canada (ca)
Print view this post

Re: Jesus said...

#138  Postby jinxu » Apr 03, 2015 7:04 pm

Skinny Puppy wrote:
jinxu wrote:
Skinny Puppy wrote:
jinxu wrote:

My point exactly =P. He's also the man who claims that quitting smoking is easy because he does it many times a day :lol: . I love Mark Twain, though I hated that my mom made me read his books in 1st grade.


Have you read Letters From The Earth?

http://www.online-literature.com/twain/letters-from-the-earth/


In first grade? No.


No, I mean have you read it at any time?


No I haven't. I did just go read some reviews on it though. Seems interesting
jinxu
 
Posts: 180

United States (us)
Print view this post

Re: Jesus said...

#139  Postby Skinny Puppy » Apr 03, 2015 7:17 pm

It's well worth reading. I actually bought it in paperback. The only flaw is MT quotes so many passages, but doesn't reference them. That's okay when one knows them and where they originate from, but for anyone unfamiliar with them, they have to search. That's a minor quibble though.

Sent from my Kindle.
User avatar
Skinny Puppy
 
Name: Sherlock Jeffrey Puppy
Posts: 9399
Age: 37
Male

Canada (ca)
Print view this post

Re: Jesus said...

#140  Postby Skinny Puppy » Apr 03, 2015 9:05 pm

Agrippina wrote:On the idea that Jesus was allowed to cancel the old laws, because he came to fulfil those laws.

There are two issues. The one is that Jesus is supposed to be "God on earth" in other words, he impregnated Mary with himself, so that he could live incognito among humans and then sacrifice himself to himself so that people who appreciate the sacrifice can be allowed to enter the kingdom of heaven.

<Snip>

That brings back memories of when I put god on trial and you came with a new (spunky) hat each day of the trial.

http://www.rationalskepticism.org/nontheism/putting-god-on-trial-t29654.html

<snip>

The second issue is that in the giving of that law, the Jews are also told that those laws are in place for all time. They are unchangeable.


Yes, since they don't accept Jesus they are bound to the law.

<snip>

Except, this isn't true, because it says in the Bible, that only 144,000 men "undefiled by women" (Rev 14) will go there. Not anyone who goes to church, does penance, or whatever their church's version of confession is, says they're sorry and they won't do it again, then go about preaching to people who know better about how sinful they are, but only priests, i.e. the ones who actually keep to their vows of celibacy as far as women are concerned, and only 144,000 of them, will get there. So what's the point?


Everyone has the potential to go to heaven. Billions if time permits otherwise the message of Jesus would be pointless. I wish I had the time right now to get into it, but the mafia game is taking up most of my free time. So on this point we disagree. (Here's a plug for our mafia game.)

http://www.rationalskepticism.org/mafia/pirates-mafia-4-t49051.html
User avatar
Skinny Puppy
 
Name: Sherlock Jeffrey Puppy
Posts: 9399
Age: 37
Male

Canada (ca)
Print view this post

PreviousNext

Return to Christianity

Who is online

Users viewing this topic: No registered users and 1 guest