Heaven, Hell and the Devil - PeachParts Mercedes-Benz Forum

martureo · #1 06-27-2013, 02:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JB3

so would you say that jesus was more a theo-communist from the modern perspective as Botsnt pointed out? Or is he something else?

I think labeling him something which he never intended is irresponsible.

He even stated his kingdom was not of this world. I don't think "theo-communist" would fit that.

JB3 · #2 06-27-2013, 03:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by martureo

I think labeling him something which he never intended is irresponsible.

He even stated his kingdom was not of this world. I don't think "theo-communist" would fit that.

and yet he never referred to himself as god either, could that be irresponsible as well to label him god?

kerry · #3 06-27-2013, 03:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JB3

and yet he never referred to himself as god either, could that be irresponsible as well to label him god?

Good shot.

martureo · #4 06-27-2013, 03:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JB3

and yet he never referred to himself as god either, could that be irresponsible as well to label him god?

Do you really want to go down this road?

Your aptitude has not shown you to be up to the task in the past. Do you really want to go down this line of argument?

JB3 · #5 06-27-2013, 03:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by martureo

Do you really want to go down this road?

Your aptitude has not shown you to be up to the task in the past. Do you really want to go down this line of argument?

I don't remember the bible recommending threats, would jesus approve? but then again he didn't write the bible did he?

the bible is a series of stories written sometimes hundreds of years after Jesus was alive, so what he actually said and did is not exactly clear is it?

so what you would present as evidence demonstrating godliness is simply more documents written by followers after the fact, and if we are lucky, the 4 gospels were written by actual apostles within 50 years of jesus dying, or flying up into the sky depending on what you believe.

I lost a close relative 10 years ago. If my life depended on it, I could not tell you a word for word conversation between us. What I would end up writing is what I thought happened, or what I would like to think happened. Ever notice how stories you tell and retell change form over time? By all accounts the apostles went forth and brought the doings of jesus to the masses. How many times do you think they made a polished speech before committing it to a gospel? How often do you think they made compromises to make a better presentation?

JamesDean · #6 06-27-2013, 03:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JB3

I don't remember the bible recommending threats, would jesus approve? but then again he didn't write the bible did he?

the bible is a series of stories written sometimes hundreds of years after Jesus was alive, so what he actually said and did is not exactly clear is it?

so what you would present as evidence demonstrating godliness is simply more documents written by followers after the fact, and if we are lucky, the 4 gospels were written by actual apostles within 50 years of jesus dying, or flying up into the sky depending on what you believe.

This is where I have most issue. Just how accurate are these ? Were they manipulated to someone's agenda? Were things worded correctly? How about the translations how close to the original texts are they?

This problem is prevalent in nearly any kind of conversion, loss of the original occurs in language, software code, physical energy conversion (at least from source to intended form)...

Now I'm not say there are not good lessons to be learned or the books are utterly useless or anything of that nature....

I've no doubt that Christ's message was on of love and good nature.

I mean just look at World War II and the Holocaust...That was less than 100 years ago yet there some people who deny it occurred, not many likely but still some.

martureo · #7 06-27-2013, 03:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JamesDean

This is where I have most issue. Just how accurate are these ? Were they manipulated to someone's agenda? Were things worded correctly? How about the translations how close to the original texts are they?

This problem is prevalent in nearly any kind of conversion, loss of the original occurs in language, software code, physical energy conversion (at least from source to intended form)...

Now I'm not say there are not good lessons to be learned or the books are utterly useless or anything of that nature....

I've no doubt that Christ's message was on of love and good nature.

I mean just look at World War II and the Holocaust...That was less than 100 years ago yet there some people who deny it occurred, not many likely but still some.

A course in the transmission of the NT would do you good. And you might even find it interesting.

Here's a few books I'd recommend on the subject.
(lighter reading)
Misquoting Jesus, Bart Ehrman
The NT Documents, Are they Reliable?, F.F. Bruce

(heavier reading)
The King James Only Controversy, James R White
The Text of the New Testament, It's Transmission, Corruption and Restoration, Bruce R Metzger (and Bart Ehrman in the 4th edition)

JamesDean · #8 06-27-2013, 03:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by martureo

A course in the transmission of the NT would do you good. And you might even find it interesting.

Here's a few books I'd recommend on the subject.
(lighter reading)
Misquoting Jesus, Bart Ehrman
The NT Documents, Are they Reliable?, F.F. Bruce

(heavier reading)
The King James Only Controversy, James R White
The Text of the New Testament, It's Transmission, Corruption and Restoration, Bruce R Metzger (and Bart Ehrman in the 4th edition)

NT = New Testament right?

Should be some interesting reads.

greazzer · #9 06-27-2013, 03:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JamesDean

This is where I have most issue. Just how accurate are these ? Were they manipulated to someone's agenda? Were things worded correctly? How about the translations how close to the original texts are they?

This problem is prevalent in nearly any kind of conversion, loss of the original occurs in language, software code, physical energy conversion (at least from source to intended form)...

Now I'm not say there are not good lessons to be learned or the books are utterly useless or anything of that nature....

I've no doubt that Christ's message was on of love and good nature.

I mean just look at World War II and the Holocaust...That was less than 100 years ago yet there some people who deny it occurred, not many likely but still some.

I believe no one is going to seriously debate your "issue" with getting down the exact, precise words such as a tape recorder. Even a tape recorder does not capture context, facial expressions, et cet. I am thinking if I remember my religious training and upbringing correctly, Jesus was not a big fan of the ultra religious right at the time with all of their ultra legalese regarding morality, hyper technical rules regarding morality, and the prescribed ways we treat people. Rather, he made the rules really really simple for us: Love God, Love your neighbor, et cet. As for the message in the Bible, and particular messages, the Good Book is very clear. If someone wants to spend all their time to locate "inconsistencies" or celebrate the ambiguity of language, then I will refer them back to Jesus who was not a big fan of such an approach since He was incredibly clear.

martureo · #10 06-27-2013, 03:48 PM

I'll be taking a tally of the number of useless, irrelevent or erroneous comments you make in each post.

Quote:

Originally Posted by JB3

I don't remember the bible recommending threats,

Did I threaten anything? No.

That's: 1

Quote:

would jesus approve?

That's 2.

Quote:

but then again he didn't write the bible did he?

3.

Quote:

the bible is a series of stories written sometimes hundreds of years after Jesus was alive,

No, wrong. All of the NT was written prior to 95 CE.

That's 4.

Quote:

so what he actually said and did is not exactly clear is it?

Wrong again.

That's 5.

Quote:

so what you would present as evidence demonstrating godliness

"godliness"? You mean deity.

So that's 6

Quote:

is simply more documents written by followers after the fact,

Could they be written "before the fact"? Or "during the fact"?

7.

Quote:

and if we are lucky, the 4 gospels were written by actual apostles within 50 years of jesus dying, or flying up into the sky depending on what you believe.

Um, Jesus died. That's not a debatable issue.

8. You had eight different off topic, irrelevent or erroneous statements in this post ALONE. Tell me why I should even bother with addressing your previous statement concerning Jesus identifying himself as deity?

Can you even get through a single post without poor logic, or saying something irrelevant or erroneous?

JB3 · #11 06-27-2013, 04:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by martureo

8. You had eight different off topic, irrelevent or erroneous statements in this post ALONE. Tell me why I should even bother with addressing your previous statement concerning Jesus identifying himself as deity?

Can you even get through a single post without poor logic, or saying something irrelevant or erroneous?

interesting tactics, though surprisingly unrelated to the topic despite all your ridged analysis of what adheres to a topic and what doesn't.

My basic point is that nothing Jesus actually wrote has survived. What we have are third person accounts, years later, most deifying him, most presenting him as the focal point of a new religion. Contemporary non religious accounts are also spotty so we have very little feel for the man, just a mountain of what people think, and most of that much later.

Take for example Joseph Smith. We have a huge group of people who believe a mountain of nonsense DESPITE blatantly clear contemporary information still floating around in abundance.

Not that Joseph Smith in any way compares to jesus, but we don't really know do we? what if he was a big scam artist? how do you disprove that? Personally I don't think he was, but then again, there is no way to disprove any theory of that kind.

martureo · #12 06-27-2013, 04:23 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JB3

interesting tactics, though surprisingly unrelated to the topic despite all your ridged analysis of what adheres to a topic and what doesn't.

My basic point is that nothing Jesus actually wrote has survived.

1) Jesus didn't write anything that we know of. You are operating on the presupposition that he did.

2) Whether he did write or not is not important. Except those to whom shock value is important.

Quote:

What we have are third person accounts,

We have first person, second person, third person.

But who cares about accuracy in claims anyway?

Quote:

years later, most deifying him, most presenting him as the focal point of a new religion.

Glad you finally dropped the "centuries later".

Quote:

Contemporary non religious accounts are also spotty

Well, since non-biased accounts for anything during that time period were a bit more than "spotty" I'm not sure what that wins you.

Quote:

so we have very little feel for the man,

Except we have plenty to go off of. You just don't know about it or remain in denial.

Quote:

just a mountain of what people think, and most of that much later.

Much later? What the heck does that mean? And compared to what?

Do you even know what accounts of things we have in the ancient world? In comparison Jesus is the best and most widely accounted for figure in the ancient world. Bar none.

Quote:

Take for example Joseph Smith. We have a huge group of people who believe a mountain of nonsense DESPITE blatantly clear contemporary information still floating around in abundance.

As someone who has studied Mormonism for at least a decade and interacts with LDS on a weekly basis I find your analogy both inaccurate (mostly due to the anachronistic viewpoint you keep suffering from) and insulting.

Quote:

Not that Joseph Smith in any way compares to jesus, but we don't really know do we? what if he was a big scam artist? how do you disprove that? Personally I don't think he was, but then again, there is no way to disprove any theory of that kind.

Then such theories are useless.

View Poll Results: Heaven? Hell? The Devil? You buy into it?
Hell Yes!!!	15	35.71%
Hell No!!!	28	66.67%
Multiple Choice Poll. Voters: 42. You may not vote on this poll