Jesus was one of the greatest teachers in human history. His message of the golden rule is the same as other greats like Buddha, Socrates, Gandhi, Martin Luther King Jr. To live by the golden rule (or an identical ethical principle) is the only way to exist with a pure conscience, knowing that you have harmed no one and lived peacefully. This message was a great gift and example to humanity.
So, the question arises... Why, when teaching a message that stands alone as great and good, would one cheapen and ruin it with supernatural stories and the whole Jesus IS God element?
Jesus as a man teaches others that it is important to look at one's own behavior and be a responsible and good person. He was a great example of that since he lived by his own teachings. Once we attribute that ability to live the golden rule in the face of adversity to literally being a god, then how could anyone expect to follow that example. It makes being like Jesus something that we should give up striving for since it is clearly impossible if it took a God to do it! So what Jesus as god is really doing is letting people wallow in their curelty and hatred toward others since they know they are not able to live up to the golden rule, so why try. Besides, people are "Born into Sin" so they are made evil and may as well do what we are made to do. Instead of teaching that one should be like Jesus, people believe that Jesus "died for everyone's sins" so they wouldn't have to be like him. What happened here!? All the meaning and message of Jesus the human now destroyed for Jesus the "god."
Those who believe in Christ's message as a teacher, see the good in his message and try to emulate that. Those who believe in Jesus as a god and "dying for our sins" see that as a ticket to commit wanton acts of brutality and evil, as long as they believe that someone already took care of their sins.
It is therefore no suprize when one looks at the people in this country that call for assasinations, wage war, fuel the fires of hatred against their fellow humans, and gleefully destroy the planet with no regard for life, and still call themsleves Christians. They even think they are getting a heaven after their lives of evil! These are some of the sickest individuals on the planet, yet, because they took the humanity out of Jesus, they feel free to disregard his message yet at the same time claim to believe in him.
Not all christians are like that of course, but you know the type I talk about. The ones that are greedy, selfish, decietful, hate filled, embittered toward the world, and despise humanity. They don't believe in Jesus, but believe in the vengeful and spiteful god that they wrongly claim Jesus to be.
That license to remove Jesus's message from Christianity by replacing him with "god" is the evil of Christianity.
Jesus is like a goal for us to strive to be. No, there isn't anyone on earth that could do it. But it is a goal that God has set for us to do. But we know if we sin that we can always ask for forgivness
Truthinlogic: I admit that many people call themselves "christian" and are not. In fact you have inspired my next blog called "Jesus and Unicorns." These people do not follow Jesus, because they do not do what he says. I feel bad for Jesus because all of these people pay Him lip service and never put feet to there words. It really pisses me off. But like you said, not all Christians are like that. And the ones who are, aren't really Christians. They are like a muslim who doesn't perform the pillars of Islam. And so realize that these people you speak of are not Christians at all but who John calls in I John anti-Christs. They are the People mentioned in II Timothy who have a form of godliness but never understand it's truth. The way these people live is not Christianity, but evil. It is not Christianity but a Western imitation and distortion of something that is really quite beautiful.
I agree. What's the word for these people? "anti-Christs?" That sounds like it must be a pretty harsh thing to call someone! Oh well, I'll try the phrase out where it fits! Thanks!
I dont think anti-christ is the word for them that blooger doesnt know what he's talking about. Anti-Christ is the term used for the man who will come during the end times and bash God/Jesus. He will also profess to be a god, and say he's better than God, kind of like Lucifer but he's just a forerunner for Lucifer/ The devil. So the term you would use for people who dont believe in God is a nonbeliever, or a spritual blind person. Not an Anti-Christ.
unless they really are anti Jesus. In the English language, you could say "the Anti-Christ" which is who you're talking about or you can say someone is anti-Christ the same way you can say they're anti-Clinton or anti-abortion.
Yes, but exactly how far must one go to be following Jesus? I thought all you had to do was repent and everything is all good after that.
Find out everything you need to know about poop here:
http://progressiveu.org/000701-everything-you-need-know-about-poop
If you give your life to Christ and accept him as your Lord and Saviour you are a christan. But yeah most people "claim to be christians" but you can tell by their actions. Christian means Christ like or like Christ, thats what they are suppose to be so everyone will be held accountable for their actions by God on the day of judgemt. So those "Christians" will get their just desserts for playing religion or thinking they are able to play God, ehich is entirely impossible because he is omnipresent. Man can fool humans by saying they are a "christian" but you cant play God!
I dont see a problem at all with Jesus being God incarnate. Insofar as that this might put him way above our heads in terms of emulating him - no, I dont think so - because we are all made in the image of God in our spirit - and it is precisely God's spirit within us that changes our weaknesses, our humanity to elevate us to that place where we are one with Him (which is how it was in the beginning) and how it always was meant to be - maybe we lost this along the way (well, we did actually).
I used to think that Jesus was telling us to do the impossible, but then I thought 'why would he tell us to do something if he knew we never could?'
The message that Jesus was God in human form is so mind blowing that yes, it might beggar belief and we may choose to discard this in favour of something more comfortable, like he was merely a prophet, a seer, a good man. But the nugget of gold is at the heart - and it is not so much a superhuman effort to strive to believe what seems to be unbelievable, it is merely a question of having one's eyes opened in the spiritual sense. I didnt know what to believe once. I acknowledged Jesus in my head, but my heart was incapable of really 'seeing' the truth. I dared to step out one day and pray "Well, if you are who you say you are, prove it to me".
The 'proof' came in an explosive way (which I wont go into now!) and at that moment the most important journey I would ever take happened - from my head to my heart - what I now call my 'knower'. Only then do you know the truth and yes, that truth really does change your life and set you free.
I have known Jesus for who He is for 30 years now and even though my heart has been battered in different ways, and even though I may have tried to believe that the whole thing was a cruel lie (especially backed up by the myriad of books on the market now declaring this very thing) I can never shake the fact that I KNOW He is who he says he is and he is very much alive. In fact I shall go further - I know Him personally - cant deny it!
So if in doubt - ask Him, ask even if you dont believe you are even talking to him! Then wait and see the answer come. For yes, if you ask with a sincere heart, he will answer, no doubt about it. Then you will know too!
I liked his character's response to the question of when he first realized that he was god.
"One night I was praying and I realized that I was talking to myself."
Sorry, had to do that ... but I firmly believe that we are so heavily programmed as children to follow whatever the religion of our parents or community is that we are prey to all sorts of inner pressures to follow that system.
I chose to follow the path of reason and evidence. Religions allow little room to do that.
Very good point. There's such an emotional tie with religion drilled in our head from childhood that it's hard to let go of it even if you see that it is flawed.
Find out everything you need to know about poop here:
http://progressiveu.org/000701-everything-you-need-know-about-poop
Yeah and that means that if you know what you are doing like: stealing, lieing, fornicating, and still think oh God can save me its like ummmmmmmm who are you fooling?
It's true God is a forgiving God no doubt about that, but it also says in the bible that God is not mocked! Which means that if you know what sin you are guilty of or know that what your doing is wrong anyways and yet you still do it and an hour later
"oh God forgive me"! It doesnt work like that, thats like your cousin who asks for money everyday and says everyday i'll pay you back and yet he doesnt? How would you feel about that cousin? Or a stranger bumps into you and says sorry, but that same strnger bumps into you EVERY SINGLE DAY!! Is he really serious?
So why would God be any different, when he knows that your serious, he will welcome you back with open arms, because we serve a great God!
David Gallegos
iam sceptical about god, mostly because no matter how hard i try i cannot find answers to questions with no answers. When you "pray" to him is it him or your consious? its easy to let go of your problems and life to god and have him deal with it. im not going to go on of if i was god or if's, that's, or butt's. just questioning and statements?
i believe there is a god, we are too complex to just happen. i do not believe in his message though. that to believe in jesus christ and the god of the bible is the key to everlasting life. i want to do what i want in this life, no satan no god, just what i feel is right and what i want. i stoped being a believer because i wantted freedom. ill agree without giving away your problems to someone, thing, or god life is hard, but i pull threw everyday finding happiness within and within family.
i've been called prideful or stubborn and i am, but if god gets you threw the day and makes you happy knock your socks off, i find comfort and stregnth in myself when i hear what my soul sings and i dont hate god, just dont agree with him. somedays i dont even think about god, satan, faith, christ, etc. and just go on threw my day and i just dont believe in anything until someone brings up the subject.
wow, it feels good finaly being honest with myself instead of bs'n my thoughts n2 one way or the other on the subject.
"But it is a goal that God has set for us to do. But we know if we sin that we can always ask for forgivness"
So by that statement if I kill someone out of cold blood I to can ask for forgiveness? Could Hitler ask for forgiveness after the attrocities he committed?
i really dont know what to say youve put somestuff out there that is hard and is making me think, for that i thank you. and for not pining that samething on all christians. but i think ill talk to my pastor about this, i dont know if i get where your really coming from. but its cool that your thinking about this stuff and questioning it.
Of course pastors, priests and ministers will be against Jesus as a human, because it would put them out of business over night. If we all have the ability to be Christ like, and start to do so, there will be no need for governments, churches, religion, warfare. Lots of people stand to lose if people all start to love and help and care for one another. That is why it is held that Christ is not human, so people think they lack the will power. Why do you think Martin Luther King Jr., Gandhi, Socrates, etc. were killed by the powers of their time, yet never lifted a finger in violence and never harmed another person?
That those messages haven't changed in thousands of years.
Satan: "Ye shall not surely die"
You: "You have absolutely no proof of an afterlife"
Satan: "...and ye shall be as gods"
You: "we all have the ability to be Christ like"
Remember also that those who crucified Jesus also claimed that he was not the Messiah. Doesn't it at least bother you a little bit to know you are repeating the words of Satan almost to a tee and following in the footsteps of those who murdered Jesus?
Actually, you are the one who should watch what your saying if you believe in hell. Since like I stated in the other responses, you are playing the part of the "Anti-Christ" who replaces the good message of Jesus, with hatred and anger. Which actually proves my point that the "god" attachment to Jesus that you have done, pushes you into a life of Hate and fear instead of Love and peace, which is what Jesus's message was about. Thank you for proving my point.
I agree that there are people like that. I don't see where Kix did that. I believe Satan is behind a lot of things in this world. That is not to say you are Satan if that's why you thought it was hateful. I thought those statements were right on although I do respect your right to dissagree.
We are no longer discussing this because it was an insane and useless arguement we were having. More importantly I think Kix felt hurt somehow and I feel bad for having accidently doing that to Kix, so I apologized.
There was much more to Jesus’ message than the Golden Rule. You cannot just take the parts of his teachings that you’re comfortable with and discard the rest. Of course no one can live up to the standard that Jesus kept, that was why he came. And the most important message he left us with was not one of futility, but one of hope; the hope of salvation through acceptance of him as Messiah and repentance. As for antichrists, Jesus said that those who reject the salvation he offers are the antichrists, not those who spread the message of his salvation.
John 3: 3. Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.
To be born again is to accept the salvation of Jesus and repent of our sins.
Matthew 28:19. Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost
Don't talk to your pastor about it, talk to yourself about it! You are a person with a brain. This makes you capable of thinking for yourself. Your religious view should be a result of your own ideas.
Find out everything you need to know about poop here:
http://progressiveu.org/000701-everything-you-need-know-about-poop
sry one more thing just a question when i was rereading your blog. do you believe in a God at all? are you saying that jesus and god are two seperate beings or the same. or if you think that there is no God then where did jesus come from. because there is really no explanation for him being born or his death and resurection with out God or without being a part of God. yeah i was just wondering what your thoughts were? thanks
Jesus came from the same place you and I did. His parents. The facts around it were distorted over time just like many things over time get distorted. Especially when power is involved. Jesus was just a person like any of us, just one that is really good like Martin Luther King Jr. or Gandhi was.
Instead of the power of love and being good to one another being forwarded as the spirit of Jesus's message, it got comondered to forward an agenda of power by the Church and governments by attributing "god" type stuff to his life and message.
The devine nature of Jesus was added to make people believe Christ-like uncorruptability is impossible to achieve since it requires being a "god." That is how those in power keep the people from trying to peacefully fight against those who continue to do evil.
How does someone have an excuse to be cruel and hate filled, when someone else is being totally good under similar circumstances?
I really enjoy this treatment of Christianity. If we took Jesus' teachings as a moral guide the world would be better for it. And I don't mean all the crap listed as "laws" in the old testament, not even really any of the religious aspects either. But if we actually tried to live by the core of Jesus' teachings, the golden rule, (which I strive for personally every day because only I can determine my life, my future, my happiness) we could eliminate much of the hate being passed around.
Jesus allowed himself to be killed because He claimed to be God. He did claim to be God. The priests and everyone in the crowd understood that when they called Him a blasphemer.
You speak as though you were there, that you have some evidence to back up your claims of greater knowledge thatn the rest of us.
You do not.
You've mangled and misunderstood the message to suit your 'progressive' purpose. You're trying to neuter the message of Jesus by making him merely a great teacher and not the son of God: someone we should respect to a point, but not worship or glorify.
That is the one argument you can't make and be intellectually honest.
Jesus claimed repeatedly to be the son of God and the fulfilment of ancient prophesies. He told his followers they would have to eat his flesh and drink his blood or they could not share in the kingdom.
So, either he's the son of God and all of this is true...he is the sacrifice to pay the price for man's sin---or he's a raving lunatic and a liar.
Calling him a good teacher, while denying his divine nature is the weakest argument you can make.
The only reason to make the argument is to deny Christianity weakly. Perhaps you want to aviod offending? I'm not sure, but if you don't believe he was the son of God, then how can someone who claimed to be able to forgive sin, cure the sick through their own faith, walk on water and rise from the dead be a 'good teacher.' These things are essential to his nature. He claimed them for himself.
You've put yourself in an omnipotent position to claim that 'the facts around it were distored over time like many things over time get distored.'
How do you know it's distorted? How do you know which facts are distorted? Or, are you simply applying what seems to make sense to you and calling that fact. Just because you believe something to be true, does not make it fact. Facts require irrefutable evidence. Something you do not have. What you have is an argument that doesn't fit with the evidence you do have, so you convenient claim that the truth has been distorted over time from your pristine version of the truth.
So if being progressive means getting to make up your own facts and then denigrating those you don't like with them, it sounds like a particularly easy path for someone who doesn't really understand what they're arguing.
There is definate, unrefutable evidence of mistranslations and additions to the bible that didn't exist in the earliest copies.
I am sure it has been mentioned on this post before but check out Bart Ehrman's book "Misquoting Jesus." Mr. Ehrman is a man who devoted his life to Christianity and through his search for the ultimate truth in the bible he found the opposite. All the discrepancies forced him to really look at his faith and in the end he turned to atheism. Here is a link to a story on NPR about Mr. Ehrman and his book...
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5052156
Does not Jesus himself claim to be God?
Was Jesus perfect?
Was Jesus crazy when He commanded the crowds to "eat my flesh and drink my blood," or was He refering to a much deeper act?
Has anyone else ever come close to living a blameless life?
Think about these things, turn them over in your mind, and then decide.
-mersayochan
Yes others have lived blameless lives like, Socrates, Buddha, Martin Luther King Jr., Gandhi, Henry David Thoreau, and many others who have acted with complete selflessness just like Jesus. Many others have also lived with the most kindness toward their fellow person and who have lived humble quiet lives that we don't hear of.
The Jesus proclaiming to BE God was probably added for dramatic effect after the fact.
To think Jesus was any different from others who led similar lives is do really do disservice to what Jesus really did in teaching us that people CAN live by the golden rule in the face of brutal oppression.
Think about those things, and decide.
So you believe Jesus never said, "No man comes to the Father but by me" or the Greek or Aramaic equivalent?
He may well have said it -- but that doesn't make it true. I can say that I am a tall, french-speaking nun from Bangladesh -- is that true, not in the least.
The bible has been misused, mistranslated, and purposely changed by man. There is no real way to discern metaphoric stories from things we should take literally.
I think the bible has an overall good message, but it also contains explanations for natural occurances that we, through science, have come to understand (i.e. Sodom and Gomorrah was probably a volcanic eruption destroying the city with fire and turning Lot's wife to salt -- ash.) We sought to explain these phenomena that we didn't understand a few thousand years ago through creating a god -- something EVERY tribe of people has done throughout our history.
They you believe Jesus was a liar?
We have no way of knowing what Jesus said. We have absolutely no contemporary first- or second-hand evidence of what he may have said. The earliest written records we have are fragmentary pieces, and date from about 60-80 years after his death. The earliest more complete text we have is from over 100 years after.
All the texts we have were from copies made from copies made from copies, and so on. Most of the scribes were themselves illiterate. They did their best to copy the symbols but mistakes were made, and the propagation of these mistakes can be traced in the copies that followed.
Peter was illiterate. His 'writings' were dictations. None of these survive. The way these texts were distributed was (you guessed it) by making copies of them.
Paul never met Jesus. His teachings and Peter's diverge significantly.
Then there were other changes. People changed the text to what they think it should have been, sometimes out of trying to make sense of what they were reading (which was probably a bungled copy) other times to fit their religious philosophy. These changes can be traced just like the copy errors.
This makes your statement pointless. IF one believes that what you think he said is what he ACTUALLY may have said, then one could ask the question. I would say we really have no idea what the man said.
Please read "Misquoting Jesus."
The divinity of Jesus is a moot point for me. As John Lennon said, god is a concept by which we measure our pain.
Just wanting to say that Gandhi did not have a blameless life - one of the main people against him is his son. In his autobiography, Gandhi admits that he had mistakes, such as not giving his children a proper education.
Also, in every religion and every community, there are good and bad people and hypocrites. Christianity is not evil and neither is any religion that promotes goodness. Religion is just part of culture that helps to provide a basis of morality/ethics and to be spiritually healthy - or in Christian terms, to be close to God.
that those other people have lived balmeless lives??? Human nature prevents that. The lack of any sin, whatsoever, was a huge part of Jesus' claim to deity. Everyone else who has ever lived on this world has sinned. He is the only one who never did, and it was only made possible by his deity.
Flesh and Blood= Bread and Wine
We don't even know whether or not these things actually happened, as there is no evidence. If anyone did the things he did now, they would be considered insane.
Find out everything you need to know about poop here:
http://progressiveu.org/000701-everything-you-need-know-about-poop
People tend to make averything sacre. Even Buddhsts are divided into two: some who believe in Buddha - the man, the teacher, and others who believe in Buddha - the saint.
Yea, why is that? Why do people feel the need to deify stuff? As if the real person isn't powerful or impressive enough? Are those people who can never be satisfied? People who look the gift of life in the mouth, and say "this can't be it", so they need an afterlife?
I wonder why everyone thinks that some holy power would want to look or be like lowly old us. We don't go around making human robots all the time. We like to make things and machines that can do what we are unable to do. I think our god would be like this, more of a force.
Find out everything you need to know about poop here:
http://progressiveu.org/000701-everything-you-need-know-about-poop
Because Jesus is G-d does not mean that we can't strive to emulate Him. It's because He loves us so much and is taking an active interest in us by coming to earth to help us that makes many Christians try hard to please Him. He didn't come to shame us with His presence but to show us the love that He is willing to provide. And because He loves us is not why people continue to sin or why they hurt people so badly-- they do it simply because they cannot help themselves. For instance, most people are not happy at their jobs, let's say you work at McD's and you make someone's food wrong. That person is already in a bad mood and so they curse you. In Christianity cursing someone is the same as killing them. Now the patron of McD's is responsible for murder according to Christianity, but that person didn't mean to kill anyone, they were angry about their food. The patron may have throught it was the server's fault, but it wasn't. And Jesus is willing to forgive us for all of these mistakes we make because when He forgives us we see His grace and try harder to earn it.
Okay, So why the god stuff? Why not just Jesus as being a teacher and a person teaching others how to live and be a good person?
Because it IS the truth.
Why?? Because someone told you so.
Reasons...please without using an inconsistant, ancient text like the bible. Real proof that is tangible.
How can you say it is inconsistant? You ask us where our basis for the text comes from, when you have none yourself to denounce it. Read Josh McDowell's Evidence that demands a Verdict, And There you will find where our basis for the text comes from.
Read "misquoting jesus" by bart ehrman.
I claim inconsistancies in the original text we derived the modern day bible from. No two ancient texts are the same -- thus they are inconsistant. Not just inconsistant in interpretation, but also deliberate additions and deletions to serve the desires of the scribe/persons seeking to spread the word.
I am not refuting the bible as a learning tool or a great lesson in humanity. But I strongly refute the laws declared in the bible -- these were rules implemented to protect and educate people as best as they new 2,000 years ago. Man has progressed quite a bit since then. We can cure disease, prevent unwanted pregnancies, understand more about the world, prove facts through scientific experiments (and continually obtain the results). If you look back at most of the "punishment" god implemented -- we can take Sodom and Gomorrah for example -- we can now explain this through natural earthly occurances.
Soddom and Gomorrah were destroyed by fire. Lot's family was warned and told not to stop their retreat from the city or they would be punished. Lot's wife disobeyed and turned around to look at the destruction. God then turned her into a pillar of salt.
--This could easily be explained by a volcanic eruption that destroyed the cities and when Lot's wife turned around she was burned and her body turned to ash (which looks pretty simular to salt to a person running for their live away from the lava).
do you look at a rainbow and only see light refracting in water droplets?
-mersayochan
(???) Yeah
Am I supposed to see something other than pretty colors lined up in an arc?
by that i mean, when you look at the beautiful things of this world, do you see their beauty, or the science that causes their beauty?
-mersayochan
Beauty is infinite. It is in every aspect of the rainbow. The whole visual picture that you see, and the orchestra of light playing through the water droplets.
No, I see those things, along with some clouds. :)
Find out everything you need to know about poop here:
http://progressiveu.org/000701-everything-you-need-know-about-poop
Sorry but I honestly don;t understand what your saying in the beggining. Are you saying that the reason the modern Bible is wrong because it's been changed from the originals. The originals were inconsistant, and the modern English is consistant so it must be wrong. Or Are you saying vice versa? Either way the Dead Sea Scrolls have disproven inconsistancies in the text. The modern Bible is at least 98% accurate to the original manuscripts. So how can you say it is inconsistant?
I am saying that the "true word of god" cannot exist in the bible because the bible exists in different forms -- Because 98% is not 100%.
The point is we shouldn't take the bible as literal, absolute truth. The book has a great message and can teach us a lot about the past and perhaps even how to deal with the future. But to take every little "do this" and "don't do this" as absolute truth seems irresponsible. This book was written a couple thousand years ago when we didn't understand most of the basic natural occurances that control our earth or our bodies.
Shouldn't we incorporate what we know to be true with what we still imagine to be true?
Why should we ignore scientific fact that has been proven time and time again over a book that was written before the modern era, before we knew about our solar system, before we knew about anatomy, etc?
i know that someone has said this before, and i too hate repetition, but i think it is a good point. If the Bible is God's word, and God is outside of time, can it ever go out of date? Some of the Bible is built around their current era, but the rest is timeless. When we think of the Bible as written by humans it makes sense that it would get out dated. But if we think of it as God's words, conveyed through men, than it is clear that it will never get old. Also many things in the Bible that were followed for pure religious reasons have been backed up scientifically. And in all actuallity there are few refrences to a "flat earth" all of which are in figurative dreams (most people use that as an arguement for an outdated Bible). The Bible also holds refrences to the circumfrence of a circle to be ~3x the diameter. The outdatedness of the Bible is really contreversial, and it really depends on your point of view.
-mersayochan
We know it was written by men. And no matter how I read it, it still seems convoluted with out-dated knowledge, and heavily tradition-based religious practice. If you want to believe that it's god's word, then you won't be able to denounce your faith in it being god's word becaues it has already made a deep connection with you.
What parts of the bible do believe is "timeless"?
First, The missing 2% in the equation are not main theme ideas but just a few words that could have been better interpreted, or that we have no translation for.
Second, Although it seems that the Bible may be a list of do's and don'ts, It really istn't. The laws and such that are seen are found in the Levitical law, and is contained mostly in the books of Numbers, Leviticus, and Deuteronomy. HOwever the entirety of the Bible is a Love story. It's about how we have these laws that we can't live up to. And thus we are not perfect. But because we are not perfect God sacrifices himself so that we could be reconciled. It's not do's and don'ts, but a story of love. It frees us from the do's and don'ts.
Third, Science is not the antithesis of the Bible. Science and History actually support claims in the Bible. The book doesn;t make many scientific claims, and the ones it does are held true by science. So you cannot disclaim the Bible by Science.
There is nothing in the Bible that has been proven wrong, and so you cannot say that science diproves it.
The catholic church imprisioned Galileo for claiming the earth revolved around the sun. The church thought the bible said otherwise and him speaking against the bible, even if it was scientific truth, was a danger so they attempted to shut him
away in prision.
"Science is not the antithesis of the Bible."
-- I never said this. In fact, I think that merging current scientific knowledge would make a far better religion. Just as with science, religion CAN change without losing its core or its purpose. We have to understand the bible in the context of the time it was written. The bible was written by MAN, perhaps with some influences from god, but I don't recall the bible being physically penned by god -- thus man HAS at the very least influenced and altered the bible by default. Thus, the philosophies/issues/problems of the time are reflected. Granted some of these issues are ever lasting -- golden rule. But some -- not eating animals that eat meat or having women as subserviant to men -- are not. We have realized over time that women are not a inferior sex, but an equal match to men. Why should I, as a woman, continue to fool myself into thinking that I cannot speak up, but must ask my husband (or father if I am unwed) to speak for me? I have a voice. I am capable of using it.
What I am saying is that times DO change, science has taught us quite a few lessons over the years. Yet religion in general (christian and muslem alike) continue to ignore siginificant differences between 2006 and 0000. Making changes to religion will NOT decrease its effectiveness, purity, or purpose --- I think it would allow for more humanity.
"There is nothing in the Bible that has been proven wrong, and so you cannot say that science diproves it."
-- But we cannot say for sure that the old testament wasn't altered after Jesus's life to make the prophecies fulfill themselves.
In addition, because a prophecy is unfulfilled doesn't prove that it exists. At this point, these prophesies are meaningless predictions of "future" events.
Science can also explain god's "interventions" through natural occurances. i.e. Sodom and Gomorrah can be explained as a volcano that turned Lot's wife into ash (salt) or Noah's ark, the scope of the "entire" world was not the actual entire world, plus the region that Noah lived in was on a delta prone to massive floodings and the rainbow is a scientific natural phenomenon - not a gift from god.
even Native American cultures have stories of a flood, the fact that a flood happened should not be argued. Also, Jews who hold that Jesus was just a man and do not believe in the Christian faith hold the same "Old Testament" as do Christians (they call it something different). It has not been changed, the same prophesies that were in the Old Testament before Jesus are the same that you can read in your Bible today.
-mersayochan
Why do we need a book to tell us how to live? Why are we so attached to ancient traditions? Some laugh when we hear how earlier civilizations carried out tedious ceremonies and rites in honor of their gods, but what's the difference between then and now? God hasn't told me that it is in my best interest to believe in him; so, he doesn't deserve my acknowledgement (not that he wants it).
Sorry I keep refering to god as he.
I agree with you. If we were to take the whole book as a way to live, then why aren't we still treating women like property? Because we've learned that there's a better way, regardless of who or what wrote an old book.
Find out everything you need to know about poop here:
http://progressiveu.org/000701-everything-you-need-know-about-poop
The reason the Catholic Church imprisoned Galileo was not because they thought the Bible said the earth was flat. You can not deduce that from anywhere in Scripture. The Catholic Church of the middle Ages and Renaissance was a tyrannical political giant aimed at controling the peoples of Europe.
"I think that mereging current scientific knowledge would make a far better religion." I kind of agree here. But would say there is no merge necessary. Science can not become the straight line by which we judge humanity; because human logic is flawed. Science will however support Scripture when science is done well and without a biased result.
"What I'm saying is times DO change." Yes times change but that doesn't mean that Scripture ought to as well. The meat thing and all that were under the Old Testament, or Old Covenant, for the Jews before Christ came. Now I'm not gonna lie, I don't completely understand Levitical Law, but I do not that all of that pomp and such is not necessary after Christ's death and ressurection. Jesus made it so people didn't have to do that stuff anymore. The Women being subservient to the husband is in the New Testament however, and I think it makes sense and aligns with real life. Not that a woman should not have a voice, but that she should allow her husband to leave. Even science supports this. Think of the anatomy. A woman's anatomy is clearly made for recieving, while the man's is made for giving and initiating.
"Making changes to religion will not decrease its effectiveness." You're right, it would probably increase its effectiveness at bringing in numbers. But numbers are not the cheif end of religion. The purpose of religion is to live by truth, and to discover truth, and to make a significant change, i.e. Jesus wasn't ressurected, completely destroys a truth claim. Yes it's easier to get along with, but if it's a lie it doesn't matter.
Concerning the alteration of prophecy. I believe that the Dead Sea Scrolls disproved that the Old Testament Prophecies were changed after the fact.
Science indeed can explain many of God's miracles, but that doesn't mean God is not the initiator of such scientific anomolies. For instance a teacher at my school had some crazy cancer, it was at a high stage and she had about one year to live. So she goes to pray, and as she is praying the tumors popped. Then she goes to the doc and he says the cancers gone. Miracle, or Science? propbably both, a miracle worked through science. But that I suppose is something that I cannot convince anyone of through dialogue, but only by experience.
So now I have a question for you...
How can science account for macroevolution, or even creation/"big bang"? is science the ultimate end of life?
"For instance a teacher at my school had some crazy cancer, it was at a high stage and she had about one year to live. So she goes to pray, and as she is praying the tumors popped. Then she goes to the doc and he says the cancers gone. Miracle, or Science? propbably both,"
--Very true. I consider a miracle an occurance that science cannot outright explain (this doesn't mean that we won't be able to expalin it eventually, but just not now). But these "miracles" also occur in persons who don't pray or even believe in god. I do think her prayer had an affect. I think that the mind is far more powerful than we acknowledge. So in a way, perhaps her own thoughts healed her...
"How can science account for macroevolution, or even creation/"big bang"?"
--At the current time, it can't. Big bang sounds good, but there would still have to be energy and mass to explode into the universe so that theory isn't fulfilling. As for creation -- might as well call it the big bang. Neither theory has any proof behind it.
Macroevolution on the other hand is far more attainable to our scientific knowledge and technology. We recently discovered that humans most likely cross bred with chimpanzees a few million years ago (and again about a million years before that). In addition, our genetic makeup is 98% the same as an ape. I think that while we have yet to find the "missing link" we have found definate indicators for that link. Of course, we may never find it, perhaps our missing link has already turned to black gold, or just deteriorated to oblivion. Either way, the theory of macroevolution has very strong indicators unlike the big bang theory or creationism.
"is science the ultimate end of life?"
--For me, it is. I am very logical. I over-analyze and re-think things until I can make sense of them. If I have no obvious proof I have a hard time understanding the motives behind it.
Plus, I find it incredibly hard to believe that any variation of many gods to one god could validate mythology into reality. What make the animal sacrifice in the bible any different than voodoo sacrifice? The bible just came up with an easier way to deal with sacrifice -- jesus. How is the christian god all that different from zeus? or thor? or allah? or shiva? Don't they all serve the same purpose --explaining what we don't yet understand?
Science WILL eventually explain all of the supernatural phenomenon that occur in our world. Personally, I think the key to this overall understanding of ourselves is the true understanding of time. Although we can postulate what exactly "time" is, we cannot really explain or control it. We made up our own method of keeping time -- we understand the difference between day and night and what causes each -- but we have yet to understand why time is constant and if it HAS to be constant. For instance, what occurs when we enter a black hole? We know that gravity affects time -- the more gravity the quicker time passes, in the absence of gravity time moves slower. So if a black hole theoretically eats all matter around it (and exhudes enough power that if we could harness it we could run a car for a BILLION miles on an ounce!) due to its incredible gravitational force, what happens to time as one enters a black hole -- does time speed up? does time stop? is the gravity so much that it would crush us? could gravity cease to exist? are black holes really passage ways through space and time?
Back to the point...I think that science is the ultimate end for life. How horrible of a world would it be for us to forfiet scientific knowledge for faith! (not to discount faith for its uses) We would have no search for knowledge, we would never advance. I admire those content with the idea that some supreme being created the world. But my mind then goes to "what created this supreme being?" and I will always be unsatisfied with the conclusion -- god has always existed. To me, that is equal to saying the universe has always existed, when we KNOW that logically the universe came from somewhere/something thus god must have too.
I like your responce. One of my biggest desires is to get to heaven so i can experience the absence of time. To experience eternity. In our lifetimes we can do only so little, yet as history marches on we draw closer and closer to our goal of perfect knowledge. But i am afraid that in every endevour, scientific or religous, we are stuck approaching a limit and not a destination. Like the old problem where the person can only go 1/2 way to the wall each time. They will never reach the wall because there will always be another 1/2 to cover. Such is the problem with science (and all pursuits of knowledge) we can strive toward a full understanding but can never actually get there, but we constantly get closer. Take for example atoms; the "indivisible particle" which is made of protons, neutrons and electons which are made of mesons and such which are made of strings. The more questions we answer the more questions we discover. But if we had an infinite amount of time (i.e. if time didn't exist) then it is plausible to learn all there is to know. I as a Christian seek to know more and more about my own religion and have read the Bible 3 times through to understand what it is saying. My father has read it 26 times and still reads it. We continue because there is still so much more to discover and understand and learn. The same goes for science. There is no end to what we can and will learn. This is what i believe from my experience.
I think you may be looking wrong at the question of the transformation of religion through time. Monotheism did not "evolve" from polytheism but instead it was the other way around. Everyone had one god (that they invented or inheirted that fitted their needs) and when communties started to be built people began to "share" gods. Thus polytheism came from varied communitive monotheism. My view.
-mersayochan
We have nothing even remotely close to "original texts." To claim 98% consistencies to original texts, one would have to have the originals.
It is not valid to use the Bible to prove the Bible. The "because the bible says it is so" is not acceptable.
The modern English version is consistent with which version? Since no original exists, the modern can not be compared with the "original."
What proof do you have the Mr. Ehrman didn't mistakenly or intentionally miss-translate the texts he read? The Bible has been verified by thousands of scholars over the course of 2,000 years and this is the only one I've heard of who refutes its authenticity or the fact that it states Jesus was the Son of God, come to earth to provide salvation for mankind. Even the Dead Sea Scrolls which are still in their original form verify the prophecies from the Old Testament that were fulfilled with the birth, life and resurrection of Jesus Christ.
Are we to assume that you believe you are a good enough person to get to Heaven without the salvation of Jesus Christ?
Then you have not looked very hard. There is a long history of scholarship that disputes the bible. And the statement of him being the only person who disputes that it says Jesus is a deity ... that is just ludicrous. Again, a long history of same, whether you are aware of it or not.
As far as the "get to heaven" statement, whether you realize it or not, not everyone believes in this magical (imaginary) place. One may as well believe in the Bogey Man, monsters under the bed, or, heck, Satan. Tell me why the Bogey Man is any less valid than Satan? Oh, "because the bible says so" is not an acceptable answer.
Sorry, but I believe that when you die, you die. Ashes to ashes, dust to dust. And there is nothing wrong with that! One's little atoms recycle throughout the universe and that is just beautiful and wondrous. It is more important to focus on what one does here and now. I don't need to earn brownie points for a mythical 'afterlife.' I need to live correctly now. I don't need scare tactics to do so or to now how to do it.
Wow, this is the most convincing evidence I've ever seen. You've pulled me over now.
Find out everything you need to know about poop here:
http://progressiveu.org/000701-everything-you-need-know-about-poop
That is how the Jewish religion views Jesus. So if you would like to learn more about that view point, check out Judaism.
I only read the shortened version of your blog. So I will only address myself to those comments. Here is the problem with what I read. Jesus was, is and always will be the greatest man that ever lived. Ghandi, Martin Luther were men, but they were just men, probably even great men is some ways. Socrates was a great philosopher too. The difference between these men and Jesus is that he died on the cross for our sins and was ressurected ofn the third day. None of these other men did that. Now you can choose to believe it or not, that is the beauty of God the father. He loved us so much that he allowed Christ to take on the sins of the world so that none would perish. Another difference between Jesus and these men is that he was and is sinless. Again choose to accept it or not, but Jesus said " I am the way, the truth and the life no one comes to the father but through me". I know in my heart and spirit and soul that this is true. Now if by some chance I am delusional and am wrong about Jesus being fully God and fully man and I die then I have lost nothing. If on the other hand,I and millions of other people are right and you and those who choose to believe your way or other misguided ways then when you/ they die everything will be lost.
I would ask you to ask God to reveal his truth to you. If you are sincere in your heart and truly seek God's revelation of his son he will reveal himself to you. If you just take it as a joke God will know your heart.
I want to clarify that I am not saying I am better than you or anyone. What I am saying is I decided to accept the free gift of eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord and have received God mercy over his judgment. None of us our good enough to get to God on our own. The Bible says " all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God."
I am not trying to belittle you in any way. I am just trying to share the truth.
The whole idea of being a good person is tainted by what you just said. Your merely fulfilling selfish motives every time you do good. Doesn't that seem wrong? Shouldn't You should do good because it is good, not because you are being bribed with an afterlife? It is pure selfishness that motivates those who attach God to Jesus? Am I the only one that thinks that sounds like a pretty sad view of humanity? I know there are many people who do good because they do good, and not because they are selfishly looking for a biblical bribe.
Oh, I think he has got something here folks. Why do we need the motivation to be good? It's like someone is holding candy out for us to do something, and the reason we do it is for that reward. Doing the right thing has nothing to do with what happens to the doer, but what happens to everything affected by that action. We are so caught up in rewards and punishments that we abandon any concept of metaphysical reason. And by that I mean, the basis of ethics has no incentive but integrity itself.
Alex J.
==============================================
"Follow not me, but you!" -Friedrich Nietzsche
Well Said! Just to make sure I understand you... People get caught up in these systems of rewards and punishments for different actions layed out by governments, religions, parent's rules, etc. Instead of ethical behavior based on what is really right and wrong based on logic and reason, it is just following of random rules set by people in power using them as they want.
You two sure make a good team.
Eternal Life is not my motivation to do good. It is knowing God that makes me want to do good. I am not pressed into doing good for hopes of heaven. I do good because I love God and I love people. There is no amount of good things I can do to enter heaven. A holy God can have no evil before him. and I obviously have done bad things, and so I needed washed away, and God washed away my evil with HIs love. And so now I try to imitate his love because he has loved me.
So if you are doing good just for the sake of doing good, then you understand that others can do good just for the sake of doing good also, regardless of a god or not? What I don't understand is why people can't grasp the fact that a god is not necessary for one to be a good person.
The belief in a God is not required for one to be a good person. But a God is required for there to be such a thing as good. Without some sort of standard of what right and wrong is, outside of man, there can be no objective claim to goodness.
I would have to disagree. If you read "Featured Blogger - Jesus" I show some of the other philosophies and ideas that have come up in history that developed the "Rule of Reciprocity" where the only logical guide for behavior is that one can not harm another, because we dislike it when we are harmed. There is no god necessary for that ethical principle to hold true. It is just the only logical conclusion one can come up with when existing with fellow humans.
I believe you are confusing the "Ethic of Reciprocity", which is commonly referred to as the Golden Rule from Leviticus 19:18, and reaffirmed by Jesus in Luke 10:27 with the last line from the Wiccan Rede " Eight words ye Wiccan Rede fulfill - An’ it harm none, Do what ye will.".
The major difference in these two texts is found in Jesus’ instruction to us in Matthew 7:12 “Therefore all things whatsoever ye would that men should do to you, do ye even so to them: for this is the law and the prophets”. You see, we are not to simply do no harm to others, but to come to the aid of others, while the Wiccan Rede does not compel anyone to help another in need.
This is one of the many pitfalls we find ourselves in when we begin to seek the truth, but search for it by only accepting the portions of the Bible that we like or feel comfortable with and combining them with tid-bits we like from other more recent sources. What we end up with is something that feels warm and fuzzy, but is actually a tiny piece of the whole truth.
Do you believe that the death penalty is okay? Do you believe that war is ever justified?
You answer the 1 question I've asked you several times throughout this thread.
I know you say you do not believe in God, heaven, hell or that there will be a judgment day. But, just suppose for a minute that God does exists just as Jesus described and there will be a judgment day, also as Jesus described. And on that day you will be judged by God (not by me) based on... say just the 10 Commandments alone. Do you honestly believe that you will be judged innocent or guilty of breaking any of those commandments?
If your version of god exists, then there are LOTS of people not going to heaven. All I know is that I try and be a good person according to the rule of reciprocity. And like I said before, if your version of this strict unforgiving god is the case, then I have no desire to be any part of his heaven in the first place. So if I did break any of them, I really don't care either way because I am just doing my best to be a good person. Does that answer your question?
Yes that answers my question; thank you. As I said I use to feel exactly the same way. At least until I found out how truly "forgiving" God is and that I needed Him to be that forgiving.
I believe that you are being honest in that you are doing your best to be a good person, but like the rest of us, you probably have to admit that at some point in your life you've told a few lies, stolen even something small and broken a several other commandments. I know I have. So, I truly hope you will consider what several of us have said to you here.
For the record, it was never my intention to hurt you. My only intention was to offer you the same truth that was revealed to me some time back. Please know that this truth is that God is very real, he loves you a lot more than you could possibly know, even if you don't believe in him right now and you do NOT deserve to spend eternity in hell. The only fear I have now is for those whose hearts are too hardened to open up to God's love and forgiveness. With all that has transpired between us on this thread, I still truly hope that you are not one of those people.
Now.. I will go and leave you to decide for yourself whether to open your heart or not. May God Bless and keep you.
No, it is not a "Biblical bribe." It is out of gratitude. I do not follow Jesus' teachings because I'm a good person. I'm not. I don't follow His teachings because I want to get to Heaven. I'm already going. I already accepted His gift of payment for my sins on the cross. Gratitude is the reason I do good. People are not good. People will do good things and bad things. People have good and bad. Good and bad does not make good. It makes maybe less bad. "There is one good" that is God.
It doesn't have anything to do with being selfish. Do you believe you are a good enough person to get to heaven without the salvation of Jesus? Or doesn’t Heaven matter to you?
Again, not everyone has this "heaven" thing in their belief system! "Being a good enough person ... " or "...doesn't Heaven matter?" is just not a valid question to ask. It is akin to asking if I believe enough to go to Peter Pan's Never Never Land.
Sorry, and I don't mean to say that in any sort of bad or hurtful way, but I trying to tell you that your question is just not valid to me and other people to whom it is not a real "thing."
I agree. I like the idea of doing good because it's good, but for some reason most Christians are convinced that you must have a bribe to do good things.
Find out everything you need to know about poop here:
http://progressiveu.org/000701-everything-you-need-know-about-poop
I just responded about this. I'm one of those people that do good things without regard to the afterlife. Nice to meet you.
Your blog ignores many of the key teachings in the Bible. How could Jesus's message great and good if He lied about being God. Him being God is not an invention of His followers, He said multiple times that He is "I AM", the same way God refered to Himself when He talked to Moses. Jesus cannot be a great teacher and not God at the same time.
One of the main themes in the NT is that Jesus helps us be like Him. Whether or not Jesus is God, we cannot be perfect. Are you familier with Jesus's teaching that lusting after a women is as bad as adultery and hating a man is as bad as killing him? No human can live up to that. With that in mind, isn't it more comforting that Jesus was God? Wouldn't God be far more able to help us be like Him than just a good teacher?
Any one who would use Christ's death "as a ticket to commit wanton acts of brutality and evil" is ignoring what Christ said. He said "If you love me, keep my commandments". We don't get saved by keeping His commandments, we keep His commandments because we love Him.
Like I’ve said before to these types of blogs, it doesn't matter how much people misuse religion, yell at each other that they have it right, or you or anyone else present logical arguments for what they believe. Reality is the way it is, regardless what we think about it.
The teachings of the bible where the supernatural stuff is added around Jesus's message is the part that corrupts the entire meaning. Why would god create this flawless person as an example instead of creating people good in the first place? That makes no sense. That is why the entire bible story is twisted around. If Jesus was the example, yet god of the same bible created people, and created Jesus as an unattainable goal, what is the whole game? It is just pointless. And that is why you are right that arguing about religion is pointless. It is just a cyclical arguement created by people to keep the masses oppressed and subservient to who ever controls the religion. At the time of Ancient Rome, it was a great way to build opposition to the otherwise monopoly that Rome had on Power. Conveniently timed? Or just a clever way that people of the time were able to twist Jesus's message to create a new power pyramid opposed to the Roman Empire? THAT is the Reality.