Jesus was a Sinner

originally posted by junglejake
On this planet it would, although it would be extremely stark and horrible. Christ won the battle against Satan's corruption of the planet when He died on the cross. In doing so, he guaranteed us eternal life if we but reach out and take it.

Some proof would be nice and the fact that we ARE here does not constitute proof.

We must remember that the Bible has been translated countless of times. The word hate could've been inserted for lack of a better word that described the true phrase. You will find what you look for. If you only look for the surface, that is what you will find.

So what better word would that be?, I mean hate is a pretty strong emotional word.

Once again I'm not Christian. It also doesn't make sense to stereotype every single follower of a religion because of what someone (who doesn't even belong to the religion) does

Have you read many of the posts here? most follow that stereotype. You might not be christian but you are religious so therefore have a religious bias.

G

I think of it this way.

Materialistic people live their lives based on the dictum that whatever feels good is good, and whatever hurts is wicked and wrong.

The first corollary of this is that what ever serves my interests is good. So my job is to take care of my family at all costs.

In other words, if there is limited room on the bus out of New Orleans, and I were a materialist, I'd push to the head of the lines to make sure MY family escapes.

Jesus, in my view, is saying that there are times when you have to put your morals ahead of your own family.

For instance, if you tell me that your going to kill my kids unless I deny my faith in public, I'm not going to cave into you.

Now, that probably makes me sound like I'm a moral monster to many folks. how could I NOT defend my kids at all costs, even if it means betraying everything else?

The fact is, I'm training my kids to be idealists, too. I'm fairly certrain my kids wouldn't turn me in to the government, if they started arresting Christians tommorrow. Even if they don't believe, they are learning about a value system where TRUTH comes before expedience. Where a person puts the GOD of TRUTH before everything, whether it means family, the state, or even life itself.

What does any of this have to do with the real world?

Plenty. Despite the fact that Christians are the "oppressor minority" in the USA this week, they have a long history of being treated as badly as anyone else.

From the Roman arena, to the Nazi concentration camps, to Darfur and southeast asia today, Christians have been tortured with horrible choices.

What Jesus is telling his followers is not how to treat people in traffic, but how to face the Despot who threatens to crush everything you ever wanted for yourself and your family.

If you've watched that movie "Rob Roy," you know what I'm talking about. Rob refuses to perjure and say that the Duke of Argyle is a Jacobite. The Duke says to Mrs. Roy. "I didn't know your husband had so much respect for me."

The wife says. "He doesn't think highly of you. He thinks so highly of himself."

Rob Roy's actions (in the movie) mean ruining his own life, becoming a fugitive, for the sake of an ideal.

Honor is a gift a man gives himself.

That's what Jesus was talking about. If you don't want to follow Jesus, you can relax, you're off the hook.

Dr strangecraft as you said "In my view" , that is your assumption. Now if you want to base your life views on someone elses views and assumptions (the bible) with a bit of your own then thats up to you, but I base mine on facts, proofs and my own deductions.
I dont need religion to get on in life and that doesn't mean I live any less different than yourself. I have kids that I learn my values to, they also get religious education at school but if they want to believe then its ok with me.

Originally posted by shihulud
So what better word would that be?, I mean hate is a pretty strong emotional word.

You misunderstood my point. There is no better word, it was used because the word that best kept the meaning of the phrase, was lacking in the english language.

Have you read many of the posts here? most follow that stereotype. You might not be christian but you are religious so therefore have a religious bias.

Just because most people do it, does not mean all people do it. This is very important to understand. I'm not religious, I practice no religion, I have no religious bias...

Once again I point out that Jesus said, "not my will, but Thy will be done." Since we are discussing whether or not Jesus willfully commited suicide, I think that is a very important phrase.

[edit on 28/9/2005 by AkashicWanderer]

Well I suppose if taken with all the assumptions as being true then Jesus believed that it was Gods will for him to die then no Jesus did not commit suicide?. But then that is assuming what is said is true.

One thing though if Jesus is God and therefore infinite then he didn't sacrifice his life because god cannot die. And if he did die just what did he give up? On earth he was condemned, battered and had threats against him, he dies and gets the right hand seat next to god in heaven. A very noble sacrifice indeed. And dying to forgive our sins, so why should anyone bother whether they sin or not when were already forgiven???.



G

[edit on 29-9-2005 by shihulud]

Originally posted by shihulud
Well I suppose if taken with all the assumptions as being true then Jesus believed that it was Gods will for him to die then no Jesus did not commit suicide?. But then that is assuming what is said is true.

If you accept that Jesus was crucified, which comes from a Bible story, then logically you should accept what it says he says...

If you accept that Jesus was crucified, which comes from a Bible story, then logically you should accept what it says he says...

But I dont accept the crucifixion, there isn't even any proof of Jesus existing never mind dying. As I said 'assuming what was written to be true'. I mean even Christians can't decide what the truth is or why isn't there just one christian faith?

G

Originally posted by shihulud
But I dont accept the crucifixion, there isn't even any proof of Jesus existing never mind dying. As I said 'assuming what was written to be true'. I mean even Christians can't decide what the truth is or why isn't there just one christian faith?

Your whole argument that Jesus was a sinner is based on the bible, and now you're saying that you don't accept it...

My whole argument is based on what it says in the bible whether or not I believe what is said is immaterial. The bible is the only "evidence" to go on, nothing else says that jesus was crucified.
Christians base their belief system on the same book, I just have a hard time believing what was written, am I not entitled to question Faith and Religion to get a better understanding especially since its not that clear cut.
As I've said already why are there loads of christian religions and other religions for that matter, You can't all be right!!!!!



G

[edit on 29-9-2005 by shihulud]

Originally posted by shihulud
My whole argument is based on what it says in the bible whether or not I believe what is said is immaterial. The bible is the only "evidence" to go on, nothing else says that jesus was crucified.
Christians base their belief system on the same book, I just have a hard time believing what was written, am I not entitled to question Faith and Religion to get a better understanding especially since its not that clear cut.
As I've said already why are there loads of christian religions and other religions for that matter, You can't all be right!!!!!

You are saying that Jesus was a sinner, and you are using the Bible as your proof. Since you are saying that we can objectively say that the bible is not 100% truth, than I can counter your argument by saying...

Jesus was not a sinner because what the Bible says he did, is not true...

It is interesting that you use the bible and twist the words when they are taken out of context to suit your own opinion. the whole chapter could be summed up as in order to be a disiple you must put GOd first. If you put God first over your parents, some might think if they did understand that you dislike or even Hate your parents.

I fail to see how being arrested, and sentanced to crusifixtion for saying he was the Son of God, is concidered an act of SUicide. Jesus was given the worst punishment of that day, even tho he was innocenet

Originally posted by AkashicWanderer

You are saying that Jesus was a sinner, and you are using the Bible as your proof. Since you are saying that we can objectively say that the bible is not 100% truth, than I can counter your argument by saying...

Jesus was not a sinner because what the Bible says he did, is not true...

Thats entirely my point but how many christians are objective about the bible? I can make a comment on the bible that most christians disagree with i.e "Jesus was married to Mary Magdalene". the christian response is "No way, never ever" but although the bible doesn't say that they ARE married, it doesn't say that they're NOT. How one of us can say for certain that we are right is stupid and illogical.

Originally posted by Jehosephat
It is interesting that you use the bible and twist the words when they are taken out of context to suit your own opinion. the whole chapter could be summed up as in order to be a disiple you must put GOd first. If you put God first over your parents, some might think if they did understand that you dislike or even Hate your parents.

The word 'hate' in this verse comes from the ancient Greek word 'miseo' which means hate (from the primary 'misos' [hatred]). If any substitute word could be used it would be like 'detest,' 'loath,' or 'despise.' Moreover, virtually all Bibles translate the term as hate. To deny this intent means to deny the Bible and the alleged word of Jesus.

Here are a few quotes just to show how nice Jesus is

"But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me." (Luke 19:27)

"Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword. For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in law. And a man's foes shall be they of his own household." (Matthew 10:34-37)

"Suppose ye that I am come to give peace on earth? I tell you, Nay; but rather division: For from henceforth there shall be five in one house divided, three against two, and two against three. The father shall be divided against the son, and the son against the father; the mother against the daughter, and the daughter against the mother; the mother in law against her daughter in law, and the daughter in law against her mother in law." (Luke 12:51-53)

"I am come to send fire on the earth; and what will I, if it be already kindled?" (Luke 12:49)

"And that servant, which knew his lord's will, and prepared not himself, neither did according to his will, shall be beaten with many stripes." (Luke 12:47)
This one here actually condones slavery and the beating of slaves

"And found in the temple those that sold oxen and sheep and doves, and the changers of money sitting: And when he had made a scourge of small cords, he drove them all out of the temple, and the sheep, and the oxen; and poured out the changers' money, and overthrew the tables; And said unto them that sold doves, 'Take these things hence; make not my Father's house a house of merchandise.'" (John 2:14-16)

So I stand by my interpretation of the verse and the word "hate" as the above quotes show Jesus just to be as 'twisted and out of context' as you imagine him not to be


G

Originally posted by shihulud
Thats entirely my point but how many christians are objective about the bible? I can make a comment on the bible that most christians disagree with i.e "Jesus was married to Mary Magdalene". the christian response is "No way, never ever" but although the bible doesn't say that they ARE married, it doesn't say that they're NOT. How one of us can say for certain that we are right is stupid and illogical.

This is fine, what is important is the fact that we have actually gotten somewhere, using the bible as proof we have figured out that Jesus did not commit suicide. This was the topic of the post, now you are just criticizing the Christian faith...

The word 'hate' in this verse comes from the ancient Greek word 'miseo' which means hate (from the primary 'misos' [hatred]). If any substitute word could be used it would be like 'detest,' 'loath,' or 'despise.' Moreover, virtually all Bibles translate the term as hate. To deny this intent means to deny the Bible and the alleged word of Jesus.

We are not certain that the gospel of Luke was written in Greek. There is a debate going on that discusses the fact that it could've been written in Aramaic.

Here are a few quotes just to show how nice Jesus is

Again you cannot use the bible as proof when it suits you, and dismiss it when it doesn't. You do not accept the bible as truth, than how can you condemm a person based on what you conceive to be false records?

The point is not whether I believe in the bible (which in a strange way I do but not the religious side to it). The point is that I'm showing people who do believe that what they believe about Jesus and the like might not be the image of Jesus that they base the said belief on.
Also how can you still state that Jesus did NOT commit suicide when
1) I've shown that it might be a possibility and
2) There is no proof, there is no-one alive today that was at the crucifixion to say for sure that Jesus wasn't thinking to himself ' I cant be bothered with all this healing and telling folk about gods kingdom. Thank christ(no pun intended) I'm being crucified on Friday'
I'm an objective person and only deal with the information available, but then again your religion is restrictive and prohibitive so therefore cant deal with religious information objectively.


G

By that mentality, I'm going to tell you that history from 1870 and earlier never happened. We all just winked into existance on January 25, 1871.

I have shown you that there might be a possibility that that could be true, and there is no one alive today who could refute it and prove that life existed in 1869.

Come on your being silly now. The fact that we have artifacts from both before 1869 and from around 30 CE shows that humans were here and the world existed.


G

Originally posted by shihulud
The point is not whether I believe in the bible (which in a strange way I do but not the religious side to it). The point is that I'm showing people who do believe that what they believe about Jesus and the like might not be the image of Jesus that they base the said belief on.

Fair enough, but what you are doing is this:

You are saying Jesus sinned by commiting suicide on the cross, this is based on information in the bible. I then show you the following quote that Jesus said while on the cross, "not my will, but Thy will be done." To which you respond to that it might not be true he said that...

1) I've shown that it might be a possibility and

Anything is possible.

2) There is no proof, there is no-one alive today that was at the crucifixion to say for sure that Jesus wasn't thinking to himself ' I cant be bothered with all this healing and telling folk about gods kingdom. Thank christ(no pun intended) I'm being crucified on Friday'

There is no proof for your point, there is no proof for my point. That leaves only the bible, which you use as proof for your points, but dismiss for mine...

I'm an objective person and only deal with the information available, but then again your religion is restrictive and prohibitive so therefore cant deal with religious information objectively.

Nothing is objective, everything is subjective. We cannot know if the sun exists, if gravity is a force, or anything else for that matter.

For the third time and what I hope to be the last, I do not belong to any religion.

Originally posted by shihulud
The point is that I'm showing people who do believe that what they believe about Jesus and the like might not be the image of Jesus that they base the said belief on.
Also how can you still state that Jesus did NOT commit suicide when
1) I've shown that it might be a possibility and
2) There is no proof, there is no-one alive today that was at the crucifixion to say for sure that Jesus wasn't thinking to himself ' I cant be bothered with all this healing and telling folk about gods kingdom. Thank christ(no pun intended) I'm being crucified on Friday'
I'm an objective person and only deal with the information available, but then again your religion is restrictive and prohibitive so therefore cant deal with religious information objectively.

As objective as you so may seem to be, you have apparently and objectively forgotten that your assertions and evidences of and for Jesus was a sinner have discounted 1800+ years of academic and scholarly analysis and commentary? So in truth, who is fooling who here? Are you fooling yourself by asserting such or are you making those theological scholars and academia look foolish, invalid, and in error?





seekerof

Originally posted by AkashicWanderer
Nothing is objective, everything is subjective. We cannot know if the sun exists, if gravity is a force, or anything else for that matter.

Actually the sun does exist?
Don't think so, just observe it by using scientific methods and one will see that it does. And if you continue to think otherwise, an extreme case would be to launch yourself in a rocket in the general vicinity of the sun, wait for the sun's gravitational field to grab your rocket, and watch as your rocket and you start to melt as you descend into it.

Gravity is a force and is also easily within proof.
Many things are objective, rather than being "subjective", contrary to what you have asserted.

Opinion is subjective.
Your existence is objective.





seekerof

Actually the sun does exist?
Don't think so, just observe it by using scientific methods and one will see that it does. And if you continue to think otherwise, an extreme case would be to launch yourself in a rocket in the general vicinity of the sun, wait for the sun's gravitational field to grab your rocket, and watch as your rocket and you start to melt as you descend into it.

There is no absolute proof that the sun exists. You cannot give me absolute proof that the sun exists. You can look at it, but your eyesight can fail you. Scientific methods? There's always a margin of error. You cannot be sure of anything except that I think therefore I am.

Gravity is a force and is also easily within proof.
Many things are objective, rather than being "subjective", contrary to what you have asserted.

Einsten's theory of general relativity is all about how gravity is not a force. Where does gravity get its energy from? If you were to drill a hole in the middle of the earth, and threw a banana into it guess what? You have made a perpetual moving machine, all through gravity!

Opinion is subjective.
Your existence is objective.

Yes, one's own existence is the only thing one can be sure of.

[edit on 30/9/2005 by AkashicWanderer]