1) What do you mean God values free will? He is the one giving it to you, it's not an achievement on your part, right? 2) You seem to have a perceived ranking, where believing in God is the pre-requisite or the only important factor. Can I know where you deduce this from? Let's say believing in God nets you the maximum 100 points in that category. Does helping all the poor people in the world net you 0 points if you don't believe in God? They must net you 'points' though because otherwise the bible wouldn't keep preaching that you should do good deeds right? On the flip side, if believing nets you the maximum 100, and helping the poor becomes insignificant... then when you don't help poor people, does God still not value it? Why would you do something that God doesn't value? From your perspective, isn't that an incentive for someone who doesn't believe to not ever do a good deed - it's 0 points anyway? From your perspective, why should I help poor people if I am dead spiritually and God doesn't value anything I do? Do you think I should stop giving charity? 3) Out of curiosity, why do you say we are dead spiritually? Does it say this somewhere? 4) So then it's possible that there will be a rapist in heaven but not Gandhi? Does this seem like something God would do? Even if you study the pattern of behavior of Jesus PBUH, does it appear to you that Jesus would say to Gandhi that he's going to hell and to a rapist that he's going to heaven? Frankly, this type of mainstream Christian theology is at least as infuriating as mainstream Islamic theology. The infuriating part is two-fold. You are either: 1) Valuing people simply by whether they believe in your God or not, to reflect what you believe to be God's method of valuing people. This means you tell someone like Gandhi that he is going to hell. 2) Not valuing people that way in conflict with what you believe to be God's value system, in which case you are not a true believer, therefore you are also spiritually dead according to your own beliefs. Have you considered the possiblity that you have no idea exactly how God values things? Are there not an infinite number of possibilities with which you can show faith to God, most of them being alien to our feeble minds? Is it possible that God doesn't care about what you label people, what you label YOURSELF, verbal declarations, etc, and that perhaps God's opinion is that doing charity is a perfectly acceptable method of communicating to God that you have faith in Him? If Mother Theresa was an atheist, isn't her entire life a stronger declaration of faith in God than someone reading sentences from a man-made book? For the LOVE of God, do you really think that when the time comes, God is going to say "ok, everyone who accepted God through Christ on the left, everyone else on the right" and THAT'S THAT? Most important of all.... Do you think that, given the entire concept of God, His judgement system would be so incredibly simplistic such that humans could mimic it on earth today? Don't you think the judgement process would be... oh, I don't know... GODLY? That matters of the "heart" are in a language that none of us could understand, even if it's our own heart? That this "heart" we are talking about is really just a black box which we have very little knowedge of and we should carry on with our life doing GOOD deeds not knowing exactly what will show up when the black box is opened? Sorry for the rant. It's not entirely directed at you, it's directed at this type of thing in general. I used to believe in the same way, and some of my closest friends believe in that way as well. They believe you are spiritually dead and going to hell too, and I defend the hypothetical 'you' when they say that. We have free will and IMO God's value system is so complex that there is no point hypothesizing about it and then placing faith in the hypothesis. Logically, your system promotes bad deeds from non-Christians, and ultimately that will corrupt Christianity, and you can not control that. What you need to do is promote good deeds and with that, we can inch closer to people's "hearts" - that is what Jesus PBUH did. If there's anything I can promise you as a non-religious person, it's that even according to your religion, it is impossible to believe that God will send you to hell if you exactly mimic the life of Jesus PBUH.
Rashmon it makes me glad that I was reaching a bottom point in my life because I don't know how things would have gone if I was doing well. thank you for the kind words, as far as an unbeliever, Jesus communicates spiritually to the heart, and you can read the gospels and ask him to speak to your heart- faith to me isn't something you just blindly jump in, faith has to have a motivation and a direction- if you believe anything without checking it out you wouldn't be wise faith is taking a step in a direction you want to trust, Jesus said something I love- to all who come to me I won't turn any away
I think of it slightly differently. If God is love as the bible says, then it makes sense that nothing else should come before love, which is what the first commandment says. I don't think of God as some kind of being. That also makes sense with the message of Jesus which came much later in time. It isn't about God demanding glory, just that nothing else should come before love. If people aren't putting other things before love then love certainly will get glory, but it isn't like a demand or egotistical thing.
Jesus is good, we were made in his image, that image was destroyed at some point and Jesus desires to restore it again I have a long way to go in the process, I am very flawed and very loved at the same time
I'm going to post a troll like post to this thread :grin: I'm not interested in shoving Jesus down your throat...I'm not interested in proving him up to you using ID cards and historical documents. Not interested in a philsophical/theological debate where we all chase our tails trying to "be right." There was a time in my life when all that was interesting to me...it's just not anymore. I don't think this "argument" stuff remotely advances the stuff I believe God cares about here and now. If the Church spent half as much time just loving the world in the model of the One they claim as they spend pointing fingers and arguing, this would be far less of a discussion. If you're interested in understanding who Jesus is to me, I'm happy to have that discussion. I'd tell you about him the same way I'd tell you about my wife...Ask me about my wife, and I wouldn't show you her birth certificate (yeah, i'm talking to you Trump) or her driver's license to prove her up. That's not why she's compelling to me or why I love her. Same with Jesus. I'd tell you about what he means to me...what I've seen of him. What I've seen of lives completely and utterly transformed. That doesn't have a lot to do with the Council of Nicea or Josephus; and you can come up with 777 reasons why you believe I'm deluded by choice or ignorance. And I'm fine with you thinking that. (and, yes, I realize the original OP was just talking about the physical existence of Jesus -- but as with all these threads, it's ultimately evolved into an entirely different discussion). It's like the man in the story in the Gospel of John who was born blind at birth and healed by Jesus...later he's asked who Jesus is..where he comes from...isn't he of a demon? etc....and the man says, "i have no freaking clue...i know I was blind and now I can see." knote - I'm right there with you. the suffering, particularly of children, causes doubt for me too. and i've said some pretty unpleasant things to God because of it. it's something i continue to consider. sometimes i get something back though...maybe it's God...maybe it's my sub-conscious..maybe those things aren't that far apart -- saying, "yeah? so what are you doing about it?" to some misfortune and suffering, it seems like i'm worthless to counter...but there's tons more that i fail to even attempt to meet with a response.
good post. important to note that Jesus said this, too. "if you're going to follow me, consider the cost...consider what it's gonna cost you to do that." i promise, you won't hear that from the prosperity gospel crowd.
I have Christian beliefs and Ghandi didn't. But Ghandi was a way "better" guy than me. He did more christ-like stuff. So, I get in and he doesn't? Seems a little off. Maybe thats how it is, maybe its not. But I don't think any human has the answers to who's in and who's out. I think God can save whoever he wants. I think he is just, fair, and will use a consistent process, dominated by love. Does that mean everyone gets "in"? I don't know. If its faith and belief that is key, and "every knee shall bow and every tongue will confess", how does that fit? My theme is that I don't have the answer, but I think Jesus is really fresh. He preaches about helping people who need help, and tells us we all need help. So I try to help people. He healed people and then preached to them. So I try to help people out and then tell them why I did it. And when judgement comes, I'll be raising my hand saying "Pick me, pick me" just like everyone else.
You are giving a good argument for an institutionalization of the canon but I still don't see this as an argument for whether Jesus that we think of existed or not. While the various councils may have rejected other Gospels and declared them false what is to say that those Gospels weren't actually right and the political reasons were driving the bishops to accept what became canon?
This is a good point that Jesus' life for the most part wasn't that exceptional for a 1st Century resident of Judea. To me that would lend credence to the idea that he might not have existed and the story of his life was a conglomeration of miraculous stories put onto an average Judean everyman. Regarding your personal story its a great story and a testament to faith. If you don't mind me asking do you think your story would be any less powerful if there was no way of historically proving that Jesus existed?
Since the Easter Bunny is originally pagan the Christians should be the ones who don't get chocolate.
This is a question that figures in almost all religions particularly monotheistic beliefs. If you are trying to win people over to your belief system there needs to be some compulsion for doing so. Consider the early Christian church which was in competition with a variety of other cults in the Roman World. Why would someone who led a good life decide to become a Christian rather worship Mithras if the end result was the same?
The point to consider is how such an ordinary life could possibly impact so much good in people, especially if he never existed. I am talking about millions of stories much more dramatic than mine. My son-in-law's father was famous for his story: He was an alcoholic, wife abuser and adulterer who was working on a communication tower 200 ft. in the air when he fell to his death. Dr. pronounced him dead, sent to the morgue. He was in the morgue 2 days. The night of the 2nd day the clean up man heard a voice traced it to his drawer and opend the drawer where the mortician had placed him. He sat up and said Jesus told him to stop drinking and change his life. He started over 100 churches and was known throughout Papua New Guinea as the man who died and lived. I don't mind any questions I actually have some time at the moment... It would not be any less powerful to me.
I have enjoyed this thread, though, because it was decently on-topic for a while and felt a little more like a discussion until page 7 or so. I like talking religion and history with religious people. Way more interesting than talking with atheists. You are right in that winning doesn't exist in such discussions but it is still always enlightening and interesting. My problem is that I am too uninvested either way to generally not come accross poorly. Of course, you made me realize that i never answered the question of this thread. ultimately, I do not know if there was an historical Jesus and doubt whether i will ever know as "historical fact" At times I have felt it most probable, at other times I have doubted it. Ultimately, though, I don't think he needed to exist for Christianity to form, expand, be good, be bad, whatever.
i like theological discussions also, i like history. and its a part of discovering history and historians argue. but i agree with max also that if more churches spent less time trying to prove that jesus existed and other claims of the bible and more spreading the message it would be a lot more receptive.
This is why I said earlier this really needs to be two questions: 1. Is a historical question whether the figure called Jesus existed in First Century Judea. 2. Is whether such a figure actually was a miraculous figure. One is a question of history / science the other is of faith. With Rhester's example they need not be inextricably bound.
amazing story Rhester -thanks for sharing. I've met a man twice now who was a pimp and a drug dealer for most of his life. during a deal gone bad, he was stabbed in the neck and head 7 times, and shot in the head, pushed out of a car and left for dead. He was pronounced dead at the scene and had an autopsy performed at the hospital several hours later. His mother across the country refused to believe he was dead because she said that God had told her he was going to be a preacher. To placate his mother, a doctor held the phone over his body so that she could pray over him. While she was praying, his vital signs came back. He now has a doctorate in theology and is preaching.
I'm no pathologist, but I believe in an autopsy, internal organs are removed for examination and dissection.
