Liberating Jesus from Christianity

Post Reply New Topic

Perhaps we should consult Satan, too, and see what he thinks about Jesus?

Extra sources are not always commensurate to finding the truth. Some deliberately deceive,
and thus detract from any honest search for truth.

Sources may be consulted with a grain of salt, once one has developed a healthy, informed skepticism.
But one errs when one simply adds up all sources of information, and then divides by their number,
and believes he has thereby found the truth.
If you have two witnesses in a court case, one false and the other true,
you can't find the truth by averaging their reports.
That's called employing a false equivalency.
The same is often used against Israel.
"Oh, the Palestinians keep blowing themselves up in crowded Israeli marketplaces to maximize casualties,
and Israel keeps objecting to this, and therefore Israel searches Palestinians at checkpoints,
so therefore, it's just a cycle of violence, and both the criminals and those who police them
are equally guilty." But of course, that's utter nonsense. It's a false equivalency.
The victims are not always equally guilty with their attackers. In fact, quite often they're not.

Last edited by Ragtime on 28 May 2008, 9:51 am, edited 1 time in total.

Extra sources are not always commensurate to finding the truth. Some deliberately deceive,
and thus detract from any honest search for truth.

Congratulations. I am glad you learned something, now try actually practicing what you preach. Believe what you're saying, instead of telling us what is obvious already.

Sources may be consulted with a grain of salt, once one has developed a healthy, informed skepticism.
But one errs when one simply adds up all sources of information, and then divides by their number,
and believes he has thereby found the truth.
If you have two witnesses in a court case, one false and the other true,
you can't find the truth by averaging their reports.
That's called false equivalency

When you are born into this world it is good to not blindly not accept everything bechause everything else does. There could arise situaltions where you possible missing out on the greater things in life. Due to the mental box set up everywhere.
It could be possible to find the truth by being open, and then figuring it out for yourself what makes sense. Instead of thinking in a standarlisized box of ingredienses that everyone does, to which you just described.
When one dissagrees with a poster, one should respect that opinioun, instead of trying to school the poster and impose ideas on him her with info that she may know already, and one should also do their research before attempt to discredit, what the poster is sharing with others, to which she may not find acceptable, but could be true anyway. It would also be also be favorable to just ignore the poster, in such case.

Last edited by starchild on 28 May 2008, 11:13 am, edited 6 times in total.

Jesus is God.

Compelling and simple.

I am like so shocked

Last edited by starchild on 28 May 2008, 11:51 am, edited 2 times in total.

Ragtime is not alone in that opinion. It's not such a nutty idea after all, that Jesus is God. Who knew?

well ringelingeling. Let's tell it to everybody, especially all religious christians, and put it on the headline news.

Last edited by starchild on 31 May 2008, 1:20 pm, edited 3 times in total.

I am not simply saying He is God. I am quoting Jesus, who, Himself, said He was God:

Jesus: "Your father Abraham rejoiced at the thought of seeing my day; he saw it and was glad."
"You are not yet fifty years old," the Jews said to him, "and you have seen Abraham!"
"I tell you the truth," Jesus answered, "before Abraham was born, I AM!" At this,
they picked up stones to stone him, but Jesus hid himself,
slipping away from the temple grounds (John 8:56-59).

They prepared to stone Jesus at that specific point because He, in quoting God to Moses, introduced Himself as "I AM",
thus committing what seemed to them to be the arch-sin of blasphemy.

And Moses said unto God, "Behold, when I come unto the children of Israel, and shall say unto them, 'The God of your fathers hath sent me unto you'; and they shall say to me, 'What is his name?' what shall I say unto them?" And God said unto Moses, "I AM THAT I AM:" and he said, "Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, 'I AM hath sent me unto you'" (Exodus 3:13-14).

Let's put it on the headline news and cnn.

Actually he didn't say he was God he explained the concept of I AM. But got interrupted. It's all in the interpetation. Which could be wrong, and the fact that the bible states this, it doesn't make it an absolute fact.

Last edited by starchild on 31 May 2008, 1:33 pm, edited 5 times in total.

Jesus was one of God's prophets according to the Qur'an. I don't see why Muslims would hate him.

Which version of Jesus are we talking about (even in the same edition, the Gospels disagree, for example, on his last words) and which version of Christianity (obviously the Christianity of Mother Theresa and of Torquemada are pretty different)?

actually it is such a nutty idea. just that it's become so ingrained in most of western culture that it's just accepted by the followers.


same thing with the concept of god as shown by the major religions right now in general. big men up in the clouds who do magic tricks and demand worship.


it's a very nutty idea...just accepted because people still have yet to shed that part of history.

Doesn't that give you joy? Just tossing out your confusion in the hopes that people will get lost in it?
You're a jerk! At least I'm being honest and trying to communicate articulate ideas in my posts.

And the Gospels do not disagree on Jesus' last words.
Their reports overlap each other in many places, and in other places they each report words
of Jesus that the others chose not to. So what?
Such slight differences are often cited by theologians as being more indicative of authenticity
than of forgery, since forgers would copy Jesus words with precision into each Gospel.
The same technique is used in the legal system today. If several witnesses all report a slightly different
version of events that is basically the same, their testimony is thought to be authentic.
Whereas, if they all agree precisely, then the testimony is considered dubious,
because the witnesses probably conferred on and memorized their stories beforehand.

It is well known in legal circles that witnesses to a factual event each report it differently, and with their
own slants and emphases.

Geez, should we assume that since the Gospels aren't word-for-word copies of each other that they aren't legitimate?
How dumb can you get, pbcoll?

Last edited by Ragtime on 29 May 2008, 9:19 am, edited 10 times in total.

eh, it's what you do.

Do not presume to do God's work.

If God exists, then you, my friend, are sinning a mortal sin: hubris.

ANFSCD:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c4COX1q7zvg[/youtube]

Last edited by Quatermass on 28 May 2008, 5:53 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Strawmen are always nutty ideas.

(Should I start a "Strawman Competition" in the PPR area, ska? )