Who is Jesus Christ?

[shabaz]

When this question is personalized, it becomes the most important question one will ever be asked or answer. Who is Jesus Christ to YOU? Jesus said, "I have come that they may have life, and that they may have it more abundantly" (John 10:10, NKJV). In 1 John 5:11-13 we are told that if we have the son in our life we can KNOW that we have eternal life. Jesus is the only way for us to live an abundant life here on earth, or receive eternal life in fellowship with God. Jesus died on the cross to take the punishment for our sins so that we could be sinless in the eyes of God. If we do not receive the free gift of eternal life by experiencing the forgiveness achieved by Jesus, then we will receive the punishment we so justly deserve. Jesus must become the Lord of our lives. Imagine your life as an automobile—Jesus must be behind the wheel of your life. The verses below show the attributes of Jesus, but if he has not forgiven your sins, been invited into your life and involved in a personal relationship with you, there is little purpose in reading on. You can change your life at this very moment. Admit your sin, repent of it before God. Believe in the atonement of Jesus on the cross and receive the gift of eternal life which Jesus died to freely give you. Invite Jesus into your life to live through you and thank him for doing so.

[mazHur]

According to my belief Jesus was a great prophet of God...
Of course he was sent to the Cross but he actually never died and will return to this wold when God permits...
Jesus is NOT accountable for OUR sins, why he should be??? that would be an unwarranted and unjustified liability put on him..Everybody is responsible for his own acts...here as well as in the hereafter.

Jesus is NOT God,,,as God is above such banal things...
He is ONe, none has borne Him nor he bore anyone,,,HE is ALL in All,,,one and the only one!

[HCabret]

I'm a Hindu. Jesus was just another Palestinian being put down by the Europeans.

[mal4mac]

"He's not the messiah, he's a very naughty boy." - Terry Jones as 'the Mother' in Life of Brian (Oops, apologies, that was Brian, not Jesus...)

[HCabret]

"He's not the messiah, he's a very naughty boy." - Terry Jones as 'the Mother' in Life of Brian (Oops, apologies, that was Brian, not Jesus...)always look on the bright side of life!

[cacian]

I'm a Hindu. Jesus was just another Palestinian being put down by the Europeans.

Europe did not exist then.
Palestine neither.
how do the two correlate?

oh and what is the meaning of your signature? :)

[HCabret]

Europe did not exist then.
Palestine neither.
how do the two correlate?

oh and what is the meaning of your signature? :)both refer to physical geography, not political geography. Europe has existed for millions of years.

Mohammed accused me of being kurdish when I expressed support for kurdish independence in another thread.

[totoro]

I've heard a lot of people debate on whether Jesus Christ even existed. A lot say there is no proof that he did. And then others say he did. So I guess I'm confused as to how a person who may never have existed can be responsible for our sins. Does anyone else have any thoughts on this?

[HCabret]

I've heard a lot of people debate on whether Jesus Christ even existed. A lot say there is no proof that he did. And then others say he did. So I guess I'm confused as to how a person who may never have existed can be responsible for our sins. Does anyone else have any thoughts on this?

Does it really matter whether he existed or not? No one listens to what he had to say anyway.

[MANICHAEAN]

I think that Christ came to earth to be our model, not only to bring us the gospel of salvation, but also to serve as a pattern for our spiritual lives. Each of Christ's mysteries comes across as a revelation of His virtues. The humility of the crib, the retirement of His hidden life, the zeal of His public life the self-annihilation of His Sacrifice, the glory of His triumph, all these disclose virtues which are there to imitate. I think the Father is pleased with us only in so far as we imitate His Son and in as much as He sees in us the likeness of His Son.

[totoro]

Does it really matter whether he existed or not? No one listens to what he had to say anyway.

Depends on who you are. I know quite a few people who make the Bible into their main focus. So yes, to me it matters.

[HCabret]

Depends on who you are. I know quite a few people who make the Bible into their main focus. So yes, to me it matters.do you love your enemies? And pray out of the public eye? Or are you one of those annoying evangelists who are always trying to convert me?

[HCabret]

I think that Christ came to earth to be our model, not only to bring us the gospel of salvation, but also to serve as a pattern for our spiritual lives. Each of Christ's mysteries comes across as a revelation of His virtues. The humility of the crib, the retirement of His hidden life, the zeal of His public life the self-annihilation of His Sacrifice, the glory of His triumph, all these disclose virtues which are there to imitate. I think the Father is pleased with us only in so far as we imitate His Son and in as much as He sees in us the likeness of His Son.
Christians make up a minority of humanity. Do you think he is a model for all, or just those who think he's god?

[totoro]

do you love your enemies? And pray out of the public eye? Or are you one of those annoying evangelists who are always trying to convert me?

Why are you being so hostile toward me, I'm not trying to be offensive here, just making discussion :)

Anyway, I don't personally believe in God, I'm just curious about people who do. My parents are devote Christians and yes, they pray and they pray for even their enemies.

[HCabret]

Why are you being so hostile toward me, I'm not trying to be offensive here, just making discussion :)

Anyway, I don't personally believe in God, I'm just curious about people who do. My parents are devote Christians and yes, they pray and they pray for even their enemies.im not trying to be hostile towards you. I'm just trying to be hostile towards the institutions of organized religion.

Also, I wish more Christians were more like their Christ and less like each other.

[totoro]

im not trying to be hostile towards you. I'm just trying to be hostile towards the institutions of organized religion.

Also, I wish more Christians were more like their Christ and less like each other.

Oh okay, I gotcha. And I know what you mean, there are a lot of hypocrites out there.

[MANICHAEAN]

Just as you get annoyed by evangalists that try to convert you HCabret, I had many years in the Middle East getting the same blinkered approach regards Islam. And so now I adopt the same level of intransigence. I have no intention of trying to convert anyone. You might be interested to know as an aside that Plato, the Greek philosopher, in his Symposium 203, wrote: "No god associates with men," and Aristotle in his Nichomachean Ethics 8. 7 wrote that friendship of a god with a man is impossible as the distance is too great.

[togre]

As one of the hypocrites, I thought maybe I'd chime in. I intend this without malice because I am a hypocrite. I know that I should be more like Christ--more loving, more patient, less lazy. etc.--and I try to be better (though, to be honest I don't try as much as I should), but I fail.

That's the point. I fail. Always. I might be loved by my neighbors, I might be better than most, but I'm never truly good. No one is.

Who is Jesus? The Bible says he is the eternal Son of God, who became true man in order to be my substitute. He lived a life without failings--where I'm rude, selfish, etc. he remained pure and blameless. The righteous life he lived and the reward that goes with it he gave to me--because I needed it, not because I deserve it. In exchange he took my guilt, the responsibility for my sin. In his death he suffered his Father's rejection--rejection my sins deserved.


As far as evidence for Jesus existing--what do you call the Bible? What do you call the community of believers that sprang up in his name? It may be evidence with a bias--and why shouldn't it have a bias--but that's not the same as being unreliable or not existing.

[KiethHoyt]

I have been both an Atheist and a Christian, and to me Jesus is an ideology that we all should live by. Regardless of religious sect or differences, the Bible (New Testament) is all about peach, love, and treating others with respect. Even if you do or do not believe in Jesus, the overall teachings are something every human should live up to.

[MANICHAEAN]

I personally do not go along with simplistic dogma that Jesus was without sin. In fact it is one of the reasons I can relate to him.
He could be rude to his mother, lose his temper, sometimes resorting to violence (temple), even appreciated a nice glass of wine and the company of what was regarded in those days as somewhat dubious company.
I wish our politicians could be less of all things to all men and more mortal.

[108 fountains]

Although I am non-religious, indeed I am an atheist, I grew up in a Catholic home and continue to be fascinated with Jesus and early Christianity from a more or less academic point of view. I am convinced that Jesus was a historical person. There is just too much evidence for his existence to deny it.

In Rome, in the year 93, Josephus published his history of the Jewish people. In it is the earliest non-Christian reference to Jesus, a single paragraph:
-
“At that time lived Jesus, a holy man, if man he may be called, for he performed wonderful works, and taught men, and joyfully received the truth. And he was followed by many Jews and many Greeks. He was the Messiah.”

Some scholars argue that the paragraph or parts of it was inserted into Josephus’s document at a later date, but there are other writings in addition to the gospels that are thought to have been composed within the first 100 years or even 50 years of Jesus’s death, that speak of Jesus and/or the large community of Christians, which also begs the question, if there was no Jesus, then where did all the Christians come from?

Will and Ariel Durant, American historians who wrote The Story of Civilization over a 40-year period, talk about some of these writings in their section on Caesar and Christ:

“About the middle of this first century a pagan named Thallus, in a fragment preserved by Julius Africanus, argued that the abnormal darkness alleged to have accompanied the death of Christ was a purely natural phenomenon and coincidence; the argument took the existence of Christ for granted. The denial of that existence seems never to have occurred even to the bitterest gentile or Jewish opponents of nascent Christianity.

“The Christian evidence for Christ begins with the letters ascribed to Saint Paul. Some of these are of uncertain authorship; several, antedating A.D. 64, are almost universally accounted as substantially genuine. No one has questioned the existence of Paul, or his repeated meetings with Peter, James, and John; and Paul enviously admits that these men had known Christ in the flesh.”

The four New Testament gospels are believed to have been composed between 60 and 120 AD. There is remarkable consistency between them, especially between Mathew, Mark and Luke (although there are also minor contradictions). There is a writing from Papias, Bishop of Hierapolis, dated about 135 AD that says that Mark composed his gospel from memories conveyed to him by Peter. I also think that the details presented in the gospels, especially of the last days of Jesus - the Last Supper, the agony in the Garden of Gethsemane, the betrayal of Judas, the denial of Peter, the spiriting away of Jesus to the home of Caiaphas, the reluctance of Pontius Pilate to execute what he thought was an innocent man, the release of Barabbas, the torture and crucifixion, the presence of Mary and Mary Magdelene and Jesus’s desperate cry on the cross, and all the smaller details presented in each of these events - could not have been conjured up by any writers of fiction.

(While I cannot believe in the Resurrection, I do find the details of this fascinating, especially that at the times when Jesus appears to his disciples after his death, they often at first do not recognize him. If the gospels were written solely for the purpose of proclaiming Jesus as the Son of God, why would the authors include details like that?)

In addition, there are many other gospels that have been re-discovered in the last century - the Gospel of Thomas, the Gospel of Judas, the Gospel of Mary Magdalene, the Gospel of Philip, the Gospel of Nicodemus and probably some other writings that I am not aware of. Some of these exist only in fragments, but all of them add to the body of relatively early writings about Jesus, which by their very existence adds to the evidence of Jesus’s historicity.

I agree with Will and Ariel Durant’s conclusion, “That a few simple men should in one generation have invented so powerful and appealing a personality, so lofty an ethic and so inspiring a vision of human brotherhood, would be a miracle far more incredible than any recorded in the Gospels.”

[Carousel]

Yes I think it is a reasonable assumption that such a man did live in those times but the real question still remains i.e. was he the son of god? To the Romans such a man would have been a potential terrorist and as such they would have kept a close eye on his activities.

Anyone can say that their the son of god but obviously they would have to prove it to be believed and according to the scriptures that’s precisely what he did in the numerous miracles he performed in pubic demonstrations. Imagine the reaction if that happened today, someone who could heal any illness with a touch of his hand, could actually raise the dead etc. The effect would be astounding and probably wipe most of the other news off the front pages world wide.

Yet the Romans, who must have kept him under close observation, make not a single reference to these mind boggling events in their records; moreover they execute him in a time when anyone was lucky to reach the age of forty. Really? You kill the only person that can prolong your life span, sorry, that stretches credibility a touch too far for me.

[108 fountains]

Well, it’s more likely that if the Romans had even heard of Jesus at all during his lifetime (Jerusalem and its environs was a remote outpost for the Romans of that time), the stories most probably would have been dismissed as the result of the overactive imaginations of a superstitious local folk. It seems interesting to me also that, if they were aware of the prophecy of resurrection on the third day, why didn't they triple the guard around the tomb for the first several days - most likely, it seems to me, that they just simply dismissed such stories. (An Indian mystic, Sai Baba who died a couple of years ago, reportedly performed similar miracles. The only reason I ever heard of him is because I lived in India for a time. Those Westerners in general who might have heard of him, as well as many Indians, just simply didn’t believe the stories.)

I also dismiss the stories of the miracles performed by Jesus for the same reason (although I do think that healing is possible in some instances, but only through the power of the mind and the placebo effect). But I think your point about the real question – was he the Son of God? – is extremely interesting. The gospels of Mathew Mark and Luke all relate that Caiaphas asked Jesus point blank “Are you the Son of God?” Only in Mark, does Jesus answer “I am.” In Mathew, he relies, “Thou has said so.” And in Luke, he replies, “Ye say that I am.” He answers Pontius Pilate similarly when asked “Are you the King of the Jews?”

Knowing that there are many versions of the gospels in English alone, and that there could be innumerable errors in translation and transcription over the course of 2000 years, I still would find it interesting to talk with a scholar who knew and could read the earliest Greek/Hebrew texts. (I think the earliest known copies of the New Testament gospels are in Greek translated from Hebrew; some of the fragments of other gospels discovered in clay containers in the mid-20th century are in Hebrew, if I’m not mistaken, but I don’t know and don’t think any of them contain accounts of the crucifixion.) I’d like to know the differences in nuance and meaning between “I am” and “You say that I am” in the original language.

Jesus is also often referred to as the Son of Man in different parts of the gospels, and I would be curious to know what the connotations are of that phrase in the original language(s).

Finally, even if he said “I am the Son of God,” what does that mean? Can it not be said that we are all the children of God? I do know that the early Christian communities debated the question, with some like the Gnostics taking the view that he was a human being and others believing him to be a deity. The Catholic Church did not come to a conclusive decision on the question until the Council of Nicaea in 325 AD.

One other note on the gospels… Most scholars put Jesus’s death in the year 30 AD. He was young – somewhere probably between 30 and 35 years old. Many of his followers were younger, so it is quite plausible that some of the gospels, believed to be written between 60 and 120 AD, could have been written by or at least informed by eyewitnesses. I don’t pretend to be an expert on these matters, but I’m interested in them and would love to hear what others think, especially those who have studied them from an academic rather than a Christian point of view.

[YALASH]

Peace be on all.
Jesus [Hazrat Esa], according to my Ahmadiyya Muslim understanding was sent in the Hazrat Moses [Musa]'s dispensation. His work was to reform followers of Moses with soft teaching, who had become hard hearted with the passage of time..... Elijah was written to come before Messiah, Jesus explained he was John [Yahya].

Hazrat Muhammad (peace and blessings be on him and all Prophets) explained the verse 4 of chapter 62, Holy Quran that a time would come when faith would ascend to Pleiades, a man would bring it back [i.e. parctice on faith would become weak, a person will restore it].....In other Sayings of his, Esa , Mahdi names are mentioned to come in latter days. A Saying tell: Mahdi is none but Esa......Then lot of interconnected signs from earth and heavens are also mentioned about latter days era (1000 years).


Ahamdiyya Muslim understanding from Quran, Bible, History and Old Medical Books tells that Jesus was put on cross on such time when he could be [B]NOT BE left for long on cross. The governor Pilate knew Jesus was innocent so he planned things. Jesus was taken alive from cross, put is tomb, cured with 'marham esa' (Jesus' ointment), then he migrated, he met disciple who thought it was ghost, he asked to touch and he ate fish.


His remaining in tomb was as Jonna was in fish. Both survived. Jesus migrated to find lost sheep (tribes of Israel), he went through Iran, Afghanistan, Panjab, the Kashmir, where he did his work with success and died at the age 120 with great success. In northern Pakistan a city is called Murree, indicates Mary was with Jesus during migration.

In Holy Quran, likeness of Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) is mentioned as Prophet Moses (a.s.), thereby as a refomer Messiah came in Moses' chain, a Messiah was mentioned to reform Muhammad's followers. Why he is called Esa /Jesus? It was to indicate stress on softness. He was also called Mahdi, which means guided one, means he would be guided by God to be a Judge and Arbiter.

Jesus gave a land mark verdict when he said Elijah was John the baptist.

When Jesus is in same position and being thought to come in original body. Obviously someone else is to come with properties of Jesus. Such metaphors are not new in religion. For example, at a place in Quran, God tells that when people made pledge of allegiance with prophet Muhammad it was hand of God over their hands. Such metaphors shows closeness, not in literal sense. Same is true for idiom 'son of God'.

For Ahmadiyya Muslims he has come in 1889 in India as ardent devotee of last-Prophet-with-last-Shariah-Muhammad (pbuh). The metaphoric second coming is as subordinate Prophet since Prophet Muhammad called him four time 'Prophet of Allah' in Hadith.

Prophet Muhammad pbuh, said after him there would be Khilafat as long as Allah Wills, then he mentioned types of harsh kings-ships, the he said, khilafat on the precept of Prophethood will come, then he stopped.

It shows, the re-emergence of Khilafat.

Ahamdiyya Muslims have Promised Messiah came, and then his Khilafat continues now with millions peaceful educated people worldwide striving to spread goodness in world without use of any force or any wish to capture lands. They only wish they have, is to capture hearts for the sake of God.

More in 'Jesus in India' in book section alislam.org

PLEASE NOTE: Important edit, bold capitols are added on November 9, sorry I missed.

[HCabret]

Just as you get annoyed by evangalists that try to convert you HCabret, I had many years in the Middle East getting the same blinkered approach regards Islam. And so now I adopt the same level of intransigence. I have no intention of trying to convert anyone. You might be interested to know as an aside that Plato, the Greek philosopher, in his Symposium 203, wrote: "No god associates with men," and Aristotle in his Nichomachean Ethics 8. 7 wrote that friendship of a god with a man is impossible as the distance is too great.i wish more people agreed with you.

[108 fountains]

Ahamdiyya Muslim understanding from Quran, Bible, History and Old Medical Books tells that Jesus was put on cross on such time when he could be left for long on cross. The governor Pilate knew Jesus was innocent so he planned things. Jesus was taken alive from cross, put is tomb, cured with 'marham esa' (Jesus' ointment), then he migrated, he met disciple who thought it was ghost, he asked to touch and he ate fish.


That's very interesting Yalash. Is it only the Ahmadiyya sect that believes this of Jesus? What do the Sunni and Shi'a say about the crucifixion and resurrection? (Pardon my lack of knowledge about the Quran and Islamic beliefs.

[Carousel]

The stories most probably would have been dismissed as the result of the overactive imaginations of a superstitious local folk.

I think not (Matthew 8:5-13).
When Jesus had entered Capernaum, a centurion came to him, asking for help. 6 "Lord," he said, "my servant lies at home paralyzed and in terrible suffering." 7 Jesus said to him, "I will go and heal him.

Nice try but it’s very hard to believe that the occupying force i.e. the Romans knew nothing of these miracles carried out in the public domain including Jerusalem which was under their direct control. According to the bible it was the Romans who were responsible for his trial and his execution.

The only references to these miracles are in the bible, a collection of texts assembled into a book form 350 years after his death, neither the Roman records of that time or the Dead Sea Scrolls mention him by name.

Although I have no religious beliefs I am not attacking those who do; personally I think J.C did exist and that he was the founder of the Christian faith but the son of God? Sorry no.

[YALASH]

That's very interesting Yalash. Is it only the Ahmadiyya sect that believes this of Jesus? What do the Sunni and Shi'a say about the crucifixion and resurrection? (Pardon my lack of knowledge about the Quran and Islamic beliefs.

Peace be on you.
1= First plz check, I have made an important edit; the words I had missed.

2= In fact, these are only Ahmadiyya Muslim views with arguments and signs and there are more independent voices in this favour.

3= In general, other Muslims think Jesus will come back and another person Mahdi will come too. Jesus will offer Prayer behind him. Currently it is 1436 AH [AH: After Hijra of Holy Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) from Mecca to Medina] according to Islamic calender; decades ago they were sure his supposed coming would be within 1400 era. But their thought did not came true. Then latter slowly they just do not speak much about it. The most waits for Jesus coming from heavens, how? some say literally, other think he will be born etc. They take Jesus and Mahdi two different person, with variations in details; many think he will kill all infidels. All this the based on alleged sayings. These sayings were invented by people to please their specific dynasty leaders and they tends to favour them. It makes wide and deep confusion. The idea of Jesus coming from heavens has come when Islam spread very fast in the beginning, people brought this idea with them. Hadith used the word 'nozul' of Jesus. It is respectful word for coming. It was ttaken literally for coming from sky. Holy Quran has used the word for 'iron', for Prophet; just meant these are bounties., not that they are coming from sky.


4=But there is very easy way, Holy Prophet's true sayings are so well connected that they are like a connected cars in a train. They mention latter days' events in terms of morals, inventions, new knowledge, global village phenomenon, diseases, new canals, vehicles, human right, wars and so on...They cannot be made artificially.


Once in while, some people claim about to be Mahdi or Khalifa. Just please see, a person call himself Khalifah and he and his group is beheading and mistreating innocent fellow Muslims and innocent non Muslim Media people. Could they be from Allah?

The one who comes (and has come as Ahmadiyya Muslims believe @ alislam.org) from Allah, comes to establish rights of Allah and rights of all Creation; he comes to spread peace, love and service for everyone. It has always been the case. When true person comes, mafias see him as enemy as they see masses will go with him.

Practically see, what is happening, one after one, Muslim countries started to fall [amazingly many of them were liberated with the help of Ahmadiyya Scholar / President of International court of Justice Hague, Sir Zaffrullah Khan's efforts in UNO], their societies are in multi-directional troubles, many are immigrating to West. How much more they will wait for savior to come from sky?

On the other hand, their promised saviour Promised Messiah as Mahdi has already come according to Ahmadiyya Muslims and he has asked to make reforms in their morals, ethics and conduct. He ask them to put down arms and take up pens, prayers and relation with God by returning to true peaceful Islam which they have forgotten because of several reasons including lack of education, hold of politico-clergies etc.

Humbly think, it is enough, it is fact.

Good wishes. (much at alislam.org)

[Bleeding Pawn]

But their thought did not came true. Then latter slowly they just do not speak much about it. The most waits for Jesus coming from heavens, how? some say literally, other think he will be born etc. They take Jesus and Mahdi two different person, with variations in details; many think he will kill all infidels. All this the based on alleged sayings. These sayings were invented by people to please their specific dynasty leaders and they tends to favour them. It makes wide and deep confusion.


These sayings, which ones?
1-Jesus and Mahdi being two different person,
2-many think he will kill all infidels
3- Jesus coming from heavens

or all of the above?

As far have searched and browsed about this topic, have never come across any tradition being labeled this as a self-invented one (meaning that after the Islamic prophet). Can you clarify this point?

Thank you

[YALASH]

These sayings, which ones?
1-Jesus and Mahdi being two different person,
2-many think he will kill all infidels
3- Jesus coming from heavens

or all of the above?

As far have searched and browsed about this topic, have never come across any tradition being labeled this as a self-invented one (meaning that after the Islamic prophet). Can you clarify this point?

Thank you

Peace be on you.

On net search one may find:

Quote:

1. There will be no Mahdi and no Isa, ie. the return of Jesus. (Classified fabricated by Shawkaani and Saghaani)
2. The Mahdi shall come from the lineage of my uncle Abbas. (Classified fabricated by Ibn Adee)
https://standup4islam.wordpress.com/2013/10/20/100-fabricated-hadiths/

and

Quote

There is also the Hadith narrated by Thawban (may Allah be pleased with him) in which the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) said: “If you see the black banners emerging from Khurasan, seek to join their supporters even if creeping, because among them will be caliph Al-Mahdi.” That Hadith was reported by Al-Hakim and Ahmad. But the chains of narration of that hadith were all unauthentic, though some Hadith scholars rendered it sound in general.
Some people stated that the aforementioned Hadith is cited to support that Al-Mahdi will emerge from among the Abbasid State. That Hadith might be fabricated altogether or its words might be distorted so as to support the Abbasid State.
http://www.onislam.net/english/ask-the-scholar/muslim-creed/the-unseen/afflictions-and-portents-of-the-last-hour/169407-authenticity-of-hadiths-pertaining-to-al-mahdi.html?Portents_of_the_Last_Hour=

Both Sunni Muslims and Shia are awaiting a person whose is referred to as Al-Mahdi (Shia call him Imam Mahdi because they are expecting him to be their 12th Imam). However, both the identity and characteristics of the Mahdi of the Sunnis are significantly different from the identity and characteristics of Shia's Imam Mahdi.
http://www.discoveringislam.org/shia_mahdi.htm


There are differences.



The resolution of differences was one of the objective of the promised reformer.

And the promised Reformer was called Hakam and Adal [Arbiter and Judge], he was to tell by the God-granted knowledge [being Mahdi (the guided one)] what is the real path which is hidden under so many things. For Ahmadiyya Muslim such a figure has come for spiritual and moral reform and the peaceful movement is on under a Khalifah (may Allah be his Helper).
Here one find many arguments: http://www.alislam.org/library/books/Introduction-Study-Holy-Quran.pdf

Good wishes.

[desiresjab]

Jesus? He's the son of that big mob boss who rules the western territory, isn't he? Over in the east a different boss and his boy take care of things.

[tonywalt]

"An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth" - oh wait, that got changed(along with the multiple wives things) dammit!

[Whifflingpin]

"An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth" may sound vengeful, but it actually means you should use moderation and appropriateness in the application of justice. It is a much fairer approach than hanging a man for stealing a sheep, or chopping someone's hand off for stealing a melon.

Jesus, of course, taught that mercy or forgiveness are often viable alternatives to justice, especially when the offence is against oneself.

[morizon]

hello, please to all viewers do not speak rubbish about suggested topics, because of your lack of knowledge concerning the topic may put you in a position where you look unwise
such behavior weaken the rational mind and make it look silly, step by step it became silly rather than just looking.

[Melanie]

….Bono (singer-songwriter, musician, venture capitalist, businessman, philanthropist, and frontman of rock band U2) was asked who Jesus Christ is and he said, "not a great thinker or philosopher because He actually went around saying he was the Messiah. That's why he was crucified, because he said he was the Son of God. So he was either the Son of God or he was nuts…forget rock n roll messianic complexes...this is like Charlie Manson type type delirium and I find it hard to accept that all the millions and millions of lives, half the earth, thousands of years, have had their lives touched and inspired by some nutter. I just don't believe it."

Me neither.

[Iain Sparrow]

….Bono (singer-songwriter, musician, venture capitalist, businessman, philanthropist, and frontman of rock band U2) was asked who Jesus Christ is and he said, "not a great thinker or philosopher because He actually went around saying he was the Messiah. That's why he was crucified, because he said he was the Son of God. So he was either the Son of God or he was nuts…forget rock n roll messianic complexes...this is like Charlie Manson type type delirium and I find it hard to accept that all the millions and millions of lives, half the earth, thousands of years, have had their lives touched and inspired by some nutter. I just don't believe it."

Me neither.


What a preposterous notion that is; because the masses believe in something for thousands of years, that it therefore must be true. Nothing worse than a rock star who is no longer relevant.

[Melanie]

What a preposterous notion that is; because the masses believe in something for thousands of years, that it therefore must be true. Nothing worse than a rock star who is no longer relevant.
Bono (post 35) didn't say "therefore it's true". He said "I just don't believe it" (he doesn't believe that millions of lives have been touched, half the earth, thousands of years, could've been inspired by some nutter) ). It's his belief based on logic.

Secondly, everyone is relevant in God's eyes. The Bible says that God places value even on the smallest sparrow…Matthew 10:29-31. "His eyes are on the sparrow", Mr. Iain Sparrow :) (those are words in a popular old hymn).

By the way, how is Bono "a rock star that's no longer relevant"? Are you above a "singer-songwriter, musician, venture capitalist, businessman, philanthropist, and frontman of rock band U2"? Do you consider yourself relevant?

[Iain Sparrow]

By the way, how is Bono "a rock star that's no longer relevant"? Are you above a "singer-songwriter, musician, venture capitalist, businessman, philanthropist, and frontman of rock band U2"? Do you consider yourself relevant?

Celebrity philanthropy is... you know, so very fashionable. Bono is no mere philanthropist though... he moved investments to Amsterdam to evade Irish taxes, his paternalistic and often bullying advocacy of neoliberal solutions in Africa, his multinational business interests; hobnobbing with Paul Wolfowitz and shock-doctrine economist Jeffrey Sachs. Sidestep the rhetoric and actions of Bono the savior, and you find an ambassador for imperial exploitation, a man who has turned his attention to a world of savage injustice, inequality and exploitation—and helped make it worse.
Bono needs to stay as far away from Africa as possible, and we won't complain if he never returns to America; his twice a decade pilgrimages, petitioning our weak-kneed politicians for evermore money to do god knows what in Africa... is getting tiresome.

[NikolaiI]

"An eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth" may sound vengeful, but it actually means you should use moderation and appropriateness in the application of justice. It is a much fairer approach than hanging a man for stealing a sheep, or chopping someone's hand off for stealing a melon.

Jesus, of course, taught that mercy or forgiveness are often viable alternatives to justice, especially when the offence is against oneself.

Yep - a lot of people don't know that. Good point :)

The phrase, "an eye for an eye, a tooth for a tooth," comes from Hammurabi's Code -

http://www.ushistory.org/civ/4c.asp

[Melanie]

Wifflingpin, yes, you're right that "an eye for an eye" meant that secular justice is to be equitable. Also of note is that before God first spoke this, He established a judicial system to hear claims and determine penalties (Exodus 18:13–26), and that system would not have been necessary if a simple “eye for eye” retribution were proper and adequate.

Ian Sparrow, I don't really give a schnitzel about google's list of Bono's sins (we're all sinners…thus the need for a savior). If this thread were about Bono then I would at least mention the good he's accomplished, but this thread is about who Jesus Christ is. The fact remains that when Bono was asked who Jesus Christ is he made a good point, on-topic, that resonated with me and others.

[Iain Sparrow]

Wifflingpin, yes, you're right that "an eye for an eye" meant that secular justice is to be equitable. Also of note is that before God first spoke this, He established a judicial system to hear claims and determine penalties (Exodus 18:13–26), and that system would not have been necessary if a simple “eye for eye” retribution were proper and adequate.

Ian Sparrow, I don't really give a schnitzel about google's list of Bono's sins (we're all sinners…thus the need for a savior). If this thread were about Bono then I would at least mention the good he's accomplished, but this thread is about who Jesus Christ is. The fact remains that when Bono was asked who Jesus Christ is he made a good point, on-topic, that resonated with me and others.

If there's any rock star in the history of rock music who has sold out to freewheeling capitalism more than Bono... well, you would have to search long and hard to find that person. Bono is worth millions, hundreds of millions actually; and just quoting your very own biblical scripture, he will not be entering Heaven anytime soon, or ever.

-Then said Jesus unto his disciples, Verily I say unto you, That a rich man shall hardly enter into the kingdom of heaven. And again I say unto you, It is easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle, than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God. -- Matthew 19:23-24, Mark 10:23-25

Far be it for a simple atheist like myself to remind good Christians what God has to say about money, and those who lust for it.

[Melanie]

Thank you for the opportunity to clarify what Matthew 19:23-24 truly means. When Jesus said, "It's easier for a camel to go through the eye of a needle than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God", He is saying it is impossible for anyone to be saved on his own merits. Since wealth was seen as proof of God’s approval, it was commonly taught by the rabbis that rich people were blessed by God and were, therefore most likely to enter heaven. Jesus said to His disciples, "no one can EARN eternal life. With man this is impossible, but not with God; all things are possible...Matthew 19:26. All, [whether rich or poor], are saved through God’s gift of grace, mercy, and faith...Ephesians 2:8-9. Nothing we do can earn us salvation. It is the poor in spirit who inherit the kingdom of God...Matthew 5:3, those who admit their spiritual poverty and their inability to earn their way to heaven will enter by God's grace. It's true that a financially rich man is often blind to his spiritual poverty because he is proud of his accomplishments and material wealth. He is as likely to humble himself before God as a camel is to crawl through the eye of a needle….but the ones who are able to humble themselves before God and admit they are sinners, despite their material wealth, will easily enter God's kingdom.
If you read the whole interview with Bono, you will realize that he humbled himself and admitted that his material success is a miracle.

[NikolaiI]

One interesting point is that eye of a needle referred to a gate, not a threading needle.

Iain, let me say I am not a Christian, nor any label really, just a human whose concern are three main issues of today, that seem to trump all other s- the mass extinction event we are possibly in the beginning stages of; overpopulation, and putting an end to war - creating peace in the world. . these three issues for me are infinitely more important than really anything else - so, having said that, I just wanted to still add a few comments. . . there are a few things that Christ taught which are misunderstood, or not really followed, in my opinion. He said, do not store food for tomorrow - that would seem to preclude a lot of behavior; he also said, give everything up and follow me - and also it is said, "doesn't God provide for the elephant, the birds, the mice, wouldn't he provide for you, who are so much more dear?" All of these comments would seem to indicate a return to nature, more or less. Back in Jesus' day, with the Earth population far below a billion, the human population and civilization hadn't reached the scope and effect we're having on the environment today. I find it interesting that he presaged the crisis in a sense, because these are the exact actions which if we would take today, would have a chance at saving us.

But, these three, "leave everything and follow me" - don't store grain for tomorrow - and "God provides for all the other animals, wouldn't he provide for you?" all seem to be very clear to me. . of course everyone interprets it in their own way - but we will either have to work to restore balance in our world (ecologically), or eventually run out of forests, fresh air and water, and quite a few collapses. We're losing 50 species a day on average, of plant and animal life - a rate of extinction which is several thousand percent higher than the background rate.

There are 200,000 more humans in the world every day, give or take, which is a million in 5 days, or 73 million a year, or a billion every 14 years. . . To me the fact that the extinction rate has gone up so highly, and the other concerns - all of these issues are interconnected, for sure; that's one of the main things we have to realize - nothing else really can be as important as this, in my view. To quote one person, every day the planet's resources are poorer, and that's a simple and interesting way to look at it, one that we don't think about very often. By poorer, I mean in terms of biodiversity and species and that sort of thing.

I don't mean to de-rail the topic too much - to me they are quite closely connected, because again, the three things I mentioned are fairly key in overcoming this sort of issue.

And also - none of this in my mind should make us sad - if only because we are far more effective when we are happy, hopeful - it may seem almost mechanical but it is very true - with hope we can accomplish illimitably more than without it. . . it's just a fact of life.

So whatever message you ever share with people, if you couple it with positive or encouraging wavelengths, that's good (if your message is good). In other words, we can reach peace, attain peace and return to a balance and harmony with our planet. It will take a large shift - and people are reluctant sometimes to do so - but the fact is, it will be easier to deal with sooner, rather than later - if we wait for later, it will be much more difficult.

There are many other things which are useful about Christ's path - finding the Spring which is within, for instance, which sustains you - overflowing with life. This teaching would rather clearly indicate that nothing external is needed for the reaching of peace and love - only to find that wellspring of life within the heart.

"Come, follow me" he said, "let the dead bury the dead."

I don't believe he ever really wanted people to have institutions, and that sort of thing - he only wanted people to learn to live in harmony. . .just my personal view.

I feel that anything that makes clear that the most important issues we have today are creating peace, finding it, and sharing it, and saving the planet from the peril we've placed it in (which we can do!) is a good thing - and anything which obscures what is important, is rather detrimental.

And again, these are just my views about Christ - I am not anything but a human, trying to help a situation - I do believe there are solutions, but a very, very different approach is necessary than what has gone before.

Strength and peace and hope to all of you.

Even every word we put on this forum is another (though slight) burden on the planet's resources. That may seem odd, but it seems to be true; so choose words well. :-)

Take care! Love our mother Earth! :smile5:

[anniepagestarte]

People are over reacting sometimes when Jesus is being mentioned in discussions,

cant we just all agree that there are lessons we could learn from his story coming from the holy book?

[affu933]

For Muslims he is the holy prophet whereas for whole Christianity he is a GOD....

[mazHur]

I just can't understand why would Jesus who is said to be son of God sacrifice his life for the sins of his followers?? And, moreover, why should we, his followers. thrust our sins on him??

I believe everyone is answerable for his own actions,,,even at this forum,,,,and nothing goes unaccounted..you reap as you sow, Jesus isn't going to turn your turnips into apples..No.
Rob Jack to pay Paul doesn't appeal to the mind in Jesus case.

[Whifflingpin]

Many threads in this forum blame God for the existence of evil itself. If God Incarnate offers Himself as a sacrifice, then we are freed from the underlying evil of creation, and hence free to act and to be answerable only for our own actions.

[mazHur]

Many threads in this forum blame God for the existence of evil itself. If God Incarnate offers Himself as a sacrifice, then we are freed from the underlying evil of creation, and hence free to act and to be answerable only for our own actions.


Zoroastrians believe in two aspects of God,,,Ishwar being the god of good, Ehrman the god of Evil or destruction which means God is a mix of the two. However, Muslims believe in Oneness of God yet they do not agree in its interpretation. According to one school of thought ...God is like an ocean and we, the human beings, waves in it. The others interpret God as an ocean too but we being like drops in it. They accept Jesus as a great Prophet of Allah,,,,and revere him as they do other prophets such as Moses and Jonah and Job.

They also believe that Jesus had no will of his own,,the same as other Prophets didn't and they only DID what was commanded to them by God itself, Hence, all prophets are regarded as 'innocent'.
With ordinary people like us it is said that we have been given WILL ,,,,,,and the option to choose. Consequently we all are accountable for our own deeds and it is therefore that Judgment Day will be 'celebtrated' ....?

[Munshie]

mazHur

You quote the official Muslim position on Jesus. Now tell me why Jesus is given so much prominence in Islam compared to the other prophets. Why is not Ibrahim the great patriarch who return near the end of the world?

[Munshie]

totoro

Yes the 'historical' Jesus is far from authenticated. HCabret with his flippant/dismissive remark about Jesus needs to realise that like Jesus, Krishna is also far from authenticated as an historical figure. Various archaelogists have argued that both characters were really composites of several local characters.

Sadly the majority of Christians are not in tune with bibical scholars/academics ( - I'm not referring to preachers here). There is quite a lot known about the gospels and the authorship of them is not as believed by the majority of Christians. I just wish people who believe whatever religion (Islam, Christianity, Hinduism etc.) would make the effort to at least learn what is known about their religious texts.

[HCabret]

totoro

Yes the 'historical' Jesus is far from authenticated. HCabret with his flippant/dismissive remark about Jesus needs to realise that like Jesus, Krishna is also far from authenticated as an historical figure. Various archaelogists have argued that both characters were really composites of several local characters.

Sadly the majority of Christians are not in tune with bibical scholars/academics ( - I'm not referring to preachers here). There is quite a lot known about the gospels and the authorship of them is not as believed by the majority of Christians. I just wish people who believe whatever religion (Islam, Christianity, Hinduism etc.) would make the effort to at least learn what is known about their religious texts.It is scholarly consensus that Jesus, or Jesus-like figure actually existed. Denying that there was a historical Jesus is like denying that Evolution or claiming that Priory of Sion is real.

[Munshie]

HCabret

I sorry but imo you are misrepresenting the consensus view regarding Jesus's existence. I have no doubt that many biblical scholars believe he existed, but the archaelogical evidence is far from unequivocal. If the evidence for Jesus as represented in the Bible was clear cut and unequivocal I guarantee that the world would be told about it in no uncertain terms, and it would push aside any other headlines in the media!

I find it extraordinary that you make the comparison with the scientific notion of evolution. IMO it suggests you have a poor understanding of evolution specifically and a poor understanding of what constitutes proof in science. Your cells contain lots of proof that evolution has occurred. There are many lines of evidence from a variety of disciplines verifying evolution. (BTW I am a graduate in science, particularly the biological sciences which I have taught for many years in school.)

[Munshie]

shabaz

What's your take on the view expressed by the Vatican that:

The discovery of intelligent life wouldn't mean there's an alien Jesus somewhere in the universe

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/the-vatican-on-space-the-discovery-of-intelligent-life-wouldnt-mean-theres-an-alien-jesus-somewhere-in-the-universe-10433527.html?origin=internalSearch

The full story is provided by the link above.

[Munshie]

MazHur

"Muslims believe in Oneness of God yet they do not agree in its interpretation."

I was brought up as a Muslim and I am fairly well informed about Islam but I find the quote (above) puzzling. The absolute fundamental of Islam is that God is one and indivisible. There is no trinity, as in Christianity - one reason why some Muslims do not consider Christians as true monotheists. Muslims certainly believe in a devil/satan. The other creations of God besides humans include angels and djinns.

[HCabret]

HCabret

I sorry but imo you are misrepresenting the consensus view regarding Jesus's existence. I have no doubt that many biblical scholars believe he existed, but the archaelogical evidence is far from unequivocal. If the evidence for Jesus as represented in the Bible was clear cut and unequivocal I guarantee that the world would be told about it in no uncertain terms, and it would push aside any other headlines in the media!

I find it extraordinary that you make the comparison with the scientific notion of evolution. IMO it suggests you have a poor understanding of evolution specifically and a poor understanding of what constitutes proof in science. Your cells contain lots of proof that evolution has occurred. There are many lines of evidence from a variety of disciplines verifying evolution. (BTW I am a graduate in science, particularly the biological sciences which I have taught for many years in school.)
It is a fact that there is a scholarly consesus concerning the existence of a historical jesus. There are non-christian sources which describe a historical Jesus.

What do I not understand about science and/or evolution?

[Munshie]

HCabret

"Certain scholars, particularly in Europe, have recently made the case that while there are a number of plausible "Jesuses" that could have existed, there can be no certainty as to which Jesus was the historical Jesus, and that there should also be more scholarly research and debate on this topic.[23][24]" AND

"The historical reliability of the Gospels refers to the reliability and historic character of the four New Testament gospels as historical documents. Some scholars state that little in the four canonical gospels is considered to be historically reliable.[46][47][48][49][50]"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Historicity_of_Jesus

I believe you compared the reliability/evidence for Evolution with that for Jesus. But since it is not easy (as a newcomer on the forum) to scroll back to find your exact original wording, I am relying on recall. I do know the kind of evidence that science has for evolution is exceptionally sound.

[mazHur]

mazHur

You quote the official Muslim position on Jesus. Now tell me why Jesus is given so much prominence in Islam compared to the other prophets. Why is not Ibrahim the great patriarch who return near the end of the world?


I think you need to study more about Islam and Muslims.

Jesus is upheld by all Muslims as a great prophet of God...and so is prophet Ibrahim or Abraham as Bible names him. As far as Ibrahim is concerned he is called Khalilulah ,,,,and the Major Eid ie Bakr Eid ( the great religious festival of Muslims) is held in the honor of Prophet Ibrahim.

Prophet Jesus and all other Prophets are held by Muslims as sacred /holy.
But Prophet Muhammad is the final of their lineage.

As to your question why Ibrahim will not return near the end of the world.,,,Scriptures state Jesus will return because of his peculiar disappearance from the cross and his 'clone' being crucified instead. Also Jesus is known for his immaculate birth,,,

What's wrong in Jesus coming back to this world near the end of this world??? He is most welcome.

[Pompey Bum]

Hey mazHur! Always good to hear from you, my friend. :)


I sorry but imo you are misrepresenting the consensus view regarding Jesus's existence. I have no doubt that many biblical scholars believe he existed, but the archaelogical evidence is far from unequivocal

The consensus of historians, secular or otherwise, is that Jesus of Nazareth existed. The evidence, of course, is literary rather than archaeological. I'm not sure why that would bother you. Would you seriously suggest that Socrates did not exist because there is no archaeological record of him and we have to take Plato, Xenephon, and Aristophanes' word for it? Did Augutine's mother and mistress not exist because we have only his writings and not their bones to document them? In fact, most historians would probably prefer literary evidence to archaeological or epigraphical evidence alone. History is nothing without literary evidence (or rather it is prehistory).

By the way, the items you have posted from Wikipedia to defend your position actually argue against or defeat it:


"Certain scholars, particularly in Europe, have recently made the case that while there are a number of plausible "Jesuses" that could have existed, there can be no certainty as to which Jesus was the historical Jesus, and that there should also be more scholarly research and debate on this topic."

Do you understand that that means their view is that there was a historical Jesus, but that details about who he was and why he was important are still debated? If you are aware of any scholars who do not believe that Jesus was a historical figure (and there are a few), what evidence do you have that their view represents the consensus?


"The historical reliability of the Gospels refers to the reliability and historic character of the four New Testament gospels as historical documents. Some scholars state that little in the four canonical gospels is considered to be historically reliable."

Do you understand that the historical reliability or non-reliability of the various parts of the Canonical Gospels is a separate question from whether Jesus existed? Again, which of the scholars your source mentions are making the claim that Jesus did not exist and what makes you think they represent a consensus view? Would you suggest that Augustus or Claudius didn't exist because witnesses claimed that they saw them soaring to Heaven as gods after their deaths? (Please note that I am not asking you whether you think those witnesses were telling the truth). These are not rhetorical questions, by the way. Please answer them.

Several of us on this site have studied or continue to study ancient languages, literature, and history. Personally I find the subject of the historical Jesus interesting and would love to talk with you about it from that rational perspective. But please understand that I am not interested in whether or not you believe in God, which is irrelevant to the issue we are discussing. Do you understand that the historical life of Jesus and the existence or non-existence of God are different issues?

[desiresjab]

I think you need to study more about Islam and Muslims.

Jesus is upheld by all Muslims as a great prophet of God...and so is prophet Ibrahim or Abraham as Bible names him. As far as Ibrahim is concerned he is called Khalilulah ,,,,and the Major Eid ie Bakr Eid ( the great religious festival of Muslims) is held in the honor of Prophet Ibrahim.

Prophet Jesus and all other Prophets are held by Muslims as sacred /holy.
But Prophet Muhammad is the final of their lineage.

As to your question why Ibrahim will not return near the end of the world.,,,Scriptures state Jesus will return because of his peculiar disappearance from the cross and his 'clone' being crucified instead. Also Jesus is known for his immaculate birth,,,

What's wrong in Jesus coming back to this world near the end of this world??? He is most welcome.

No one believes any of this drivel. Not one person on the face of the earth believes the drivel of their respective religion. No one believes in Jesus or Allah, because the stories are patent garbage that should have been dismissed long ago, childrens' stories.

Let's see. Has scholarly concensus ever been wrong? No, I guess not. Which must be why scholars everywhere always agree.

Religious hamsters worldwide keep yawping on what they want to believe, not what they do believe. None of them believe it. After all, how could they? How could anyone? This Christian or Moslem fairytale is correct out of all the thousands of creation myths primitive man dreamed up.

While we are at it, let's get rid of the notion of intelligent design. It is not a scientific theory. There is nothing to teach. What do such idiots want, a shoutout at the beginning of each class to intelligent design? I pledge allegiance to the notion of intelligent design...one nation under god...

I believe in intelligent design because I am a mathematician. I like to say that the only people who actually do believe in intelligent design are mathematicians. Why do I not believe in Jehovah or Allah, then? Because I said intelligent design.

Anyone who puts their faith in the words of some goatherds from four thousand years ago who ate spoiled cheese and had some visions is a mere coward. These goatherds had no special connection or understanding of the cosmos. How do I know? I can read their words.

[Ecurb]

No one believes any of this drivel. Not one person on the face of the earth believes the drivel of their respective religion. No one believes in Jesus or Allah, because the stories are patent garbage that should have been dismissed long ago, childrens' stories.
.

This is mere heresy. No, I'm not referring to disbelief in Jesus or Allah, but to the notion that children's stories "should have been dismissed long ago." To suggest (on a literary discussion forum, no less) that children's stories should be "dismissed" is akin to suggesting that all fiction should be dismissed. Perhaps, in his next post, our mathematical friend will suggest that we "dismiss" poetry, too.

[HCabret]

No one believes any of this drivel. Not one person on the face of the earth believes the drivel of their respective religion. No one believes in Jesus or Allah, because the stories are patent garbage that should have been dismissed long ago, childrens' stories.So you're a mind reader with the ability to gauge someone else's sincerity on demand? Sounds like hocum pocus nonsense to me.


Let's see. Has scholarly concensus ever been wrong? No, I guess not. Which must be why scholars everywhere always agree.Do you have any evidence to counter scholarly consensus or are you being anti-intellectual just to sound cool?


Religious hamsters worldwide keep yawping on what they want to believe, not what they do believe. None of them believe it. After all, how could they? How could anyone? This Christian or Moslem fairytale is correct out of all the thousands of creation myths primitive man dreamed up.why focus on just those two religions?


While we are at it, let's get rid of the notion of intelligent design. It is not a scientific theory. There is nothing to teach. What do such idiots want, a shoutout at the beginning of each class to intelligent design? I pledge allegiance to the notion of intelligent design...one nation under god...how is this relevant to the topic of this thread?


I believe in intelligent design because I am a mathematician. I like to say that the only people who actually do believe in intelligent design are mathematicians. Why do I not believe in Jehovah or Allah, then? Because I said intelligent design.Same as above.


Anyone who puts their faith in the words of some goatherds from four thousand years ago who ate spoiled cheese and had some visions is a mere coward. These goatherds had no special connection or understanding of the cosmos. How do I know? I can read their words.Are you god? It sounds like you have all the answers.

[desiresjab]

So you're a mind reader with the ability to gauge someone else's sincerity on demand? Sounds like hocum pocus nonsense to me.

Do you have any evidence to counter scholarly consensus or are you being anti-intellectual just to sound cool?

why focus on just those two religions?

how is this relevant to the topic of this thread?

Same as above.

Are you god? It sounds like you have all the answers.

I know you live for the argument. My first imprssionm of you was a snapping wolverine.

I am God, yes. I am also a mind reader. The higher the IQ the easier it is for me to read the mind. At 185 you are a cinch, since you have spilled the well guarded secret that your IQ is one of the top several hundred in the United States. Congratulations, your IQ beats a wolverine! I do not even have to ask what you are doing wasting your time on here with the likes of me. You like to mix with Gods. You are a social climbing social warrior. Cheers.

[HCabret]

I know you live for the argument. My first imprssionm of you was a snapping wolverine.My friend, you are the one the declared no religious person, now or ever before, has ever held a sincere belief concerning their religion. If that statement is not an invitation for confrontation, I don't know what is.


I am God, yes. I am also a mind reader.I'm happy that you think this highly of yourself, but I would very much like to know if you have any actually evidence to back up either of these claims.


The higher the IQ the easier it is for me to read the mind. At 185 you are a cinch, since you have spilled the well guarded secret that your IQ is one of the top several hundred in the United States. Congratulations, your IQ beats a wolverine! I do not even have to ask what you are doing wasting your time on here with the likes of me. You like to mix with Gods. You are a social climbing social warrior. Cheers.Huh? Did I miss something?


What do you have against people with sincerely held religious beliefs?

[desiresjab]

My friend, you are the one the declared no religious person, now or ever before, has ever held a sincere belief concerning their religion. If that statement is not an invitation for confrontation, I don't know what is.

I'm happy that you think this highly of yourself, but I would very much like to know if you have any actually evidence to back up either of these claims.

Huh? Did I miss something?


What do you have against people with sincerely held religious beliefs?

Nothing against the people but plenty against what you call sincerely held religious beliefs. God has already told you there is no such phenomenon as people actually believing that I exist and that I behave as I have been accuratley portayed in holy texts throughout the world, a world that I was good enough to create. I also created those holy texts, but humans are still skeptical of that. All of them, not just some of the people. I gave them critical reasoning so they could doubt. The reason for that was I wanted to test their faith against puny science and logic. It makes the punishment more satisfying. My Moslems have severed heads. My Christains have cloaked my enemies in wood and set them akindle. That proves the system works well enough because I have plenty of unfaithful to punish.

My goat herders were divinely inspired when they copied my holy will from memory. Every blasted thing in my books is true, including pi equals exactly three. And yes, I hear every weak prayer, and act on them commensurate with the Faith of the supplicant. So far, no one has had enough faith, except Job and ol' Abe and some of my boy's disciples. If people had some faith I might answer a few prayers. It is my prerogative. Sure I tried a good butt kicking here and there. I showed the Sodomites a thing or two. Absolutely, I do genocide. I am the one God, am I not? Let me explain something, those Amorites & Canaanites & Ba-shan-ites & Midianites & Perrizites & Hivites & Jebusites & Makkedahites & Hebronites & those inhabitants of Libnah & Lachish & Eglon & Debir--got exactly what they deserved, down to the man, woman & child. Don't tell me my business, because I know genocide, I throw a pogrom like no one else. I am famous for it. Okay,... so I did it more than a few times. It was all necessary, dictated by divine logic. I do not mean to slight my Hindus or Jainists or Rosicrucians in this account. They kill for me, at least they say it is for me. That is not the complaint. The complaint is no one actually believes in me. I have said this plainly. I said in my books all men are sinners, none deserving of my grace. Yet I sent my own boy down to be nailed to a snag and suffer for you. Don't you get that? Such a simple concept. What is there to not understand? If you want something done right, send your son to slaughter, it's tried & true. It would have worked if I had really wanted it to. You see, I have other motives you cannot comprehend.

The good thing is, I know the outcome in advance, since I am God. I recently made an expansive addition to hell. So, you think Syrians flooding into Greece is something, do you? Wait until I fling you to your new lodgings in my basement, if you want to see some squalling hordes suffer.

You would like to ask why I created the universe in the first place, but that is enough revelation for today. If you want more I expect some practiced teeth gnashing from you. Don't get shy now. I want those lips foaming with fury, then we will see about the laws of physics and arithemtic. They were separate creations, of course.

[HCabret]

Nothing against the people but plenty against what you call sincerely held religious beliefs.So you want to make it illegal to have sincerely held religious beliefs?


God has already told you there is no such phenomenon as people actually believing that I exist and that I behave as I have been accuratley portayed in holy texts throughout the world, a world that I was good enough to create. which god?


I also created those holy texts, but humans are still skeptical of that. i am skeptical of anything which lacks evidence backing it up. I have zero proof that you have ever written any text, let alone one of holy stature.


All of them, not just some of the people. I gave them critical reasoning so they could doubt. The reason for that was I wanted to test their faith against puny science and logic.whats wrong with science? why are atheists so adverse to the scientific method?


It makes the punishment more satisfying. My Moslems have severed heads. My Christains have cloaked my enemies in wood and set them akindle. That proves the system works well enough because I have plenty of unfaithful to punish. what's a "christain"?


My goat herders were divinely inspired when they copied my holy will from memory.goat herders? huh?


Every blasted thing in my books is true, including pi equals exactly three.whats the name of your book? can I buy it on amazon? is there at least an e-book copy? or do I just have to take it on faith that you actually have written a book.


And yes, I hear every weak prayer, and act on them commensurate with the Faith of the supplicant. why is "Faith" capitalized?


So far, no one has had enough faith, except Job and ol' Abe and some of my boy's disciples.huh?


If people had some faith I might answer a few prayers.I'm really confused. You've lost me. What does this have to do with the topic of this thread?


It is my prerogative. Sure I tried a good butt kicking here and there. I showed the Sodomites a thing or two. Absolutely, I do genocide. I am the one God, am I not? Let me explain something, those Amorites & Canaanites & Ba-shan-ites & Midianites & Perrizites & Hivites & Jebusites & Makkedahites & Hebronites & those inhabitants of Libnah & Lachish & Eglon & Debir--got exactly what they deserved, down to the man, woman & child. Don't tell me my business, because I know genocide, I throw a pogrom like no one else. I am famous for it. Okay,... so I did it more than a few times. It was all necessary, dictated by divine logic.
?

I do not mean to slight my Hindus or Jainists or Rosicrucians in this account.Jains reject deities.


They kill for me, at least they say it is for me. That is not the complaint. The complaint is no one actually believes in me. I have said this plainly. I said in my books all men are sinners, none deserving of my grace. Yet I sent my own boy down to be nailed to a snag and suffer for you. Don't you get that? Such a simple concept. What is there to not understand? If you want something done right, send your son to slaughter, it's tried & true. It would have worked if I had really wanted it to. You see, I have other motives you cannot comprehend.There is very little about this post which I comprehend.


The good thing is, I know the outcome in advance, since I am God.which god? Are you not an atheist?


I recently made an expansive addition to hell.which hell?


So, you think Syrians flooding into Greece is something, do you? Wait until I fling you to your new lodgings in my basement, if you want to see some squalling hordes suffer.so you're against immigration?


You would like to ask why I created the universe in the first place, but that is enough revelation for today. If you want more I expect some practiced teeth gnashing from you. Don't get shy now. I want those lips foaming with fury, then we will see about the laws of physics and arithemtic. They were separate creations, of course.what's "arithemtic"?

[Eupalinos]

desiresjab, your view is as anthropocentric as the ones you are mocking. What do you know of justice, this human-conceived paradoxical abstraction that even under ideal circumstances could only ever be partial? All you've done is show an atheist position based on the supposed injustice of God or gods of religions is no less ego- and anthropo-centric. IF by all appearances the forces of the universe seem to us malevolent, indifferent, contradictory, whimsical, reckless, it is the height of all absurdity for some species of ape to lament and moan about it. This excess is part of the Faustian self-absorbed madness of modern consciousness.

[desiresjab]

You are doing poorly enough that I can simply ignore you now. Anyone who asks me what a Christain is to merely point out a spelling oversight is not worth the effort of a relpy.

[desiresjab]

desiresjab, your view is as anthropocentric as the ones you are mocking. What do you know of justice, this human-conceived paradoxical abstraction that even under ideal circumstances could only ever be partial? All you've done is show an atheist position based on the supposed injustice of God or gods of religions is no less ego- and anthropo-centric. IF by all appearances the forces of the universe seem to us malevolent, indifferent, contradictory, whimsical, reckless, it is the height of all absurdity for some species of ape to lament and moan about it. This excess is part of the Faustian self-absorbed madness of modern consciousness.

I think I got it. A species of ape should never lament or moan. To you, this conveniently includes questioning the existence of God. Better not do that, because you are an ape. Instead, we apes should keep praying faster, eh?

I fully expected squallers. What you really want to do is defend religion, but you are afraid. You are afraid those you can now get support from against my wicked views would abandon you as just another religious "sapster." If you hate atheists, lad, I am the wrong guy. I am an agnostic.

What's his name that I just responded to insinutates I would like to outlaw religion. His insurance was a question mark at the end of his sentence. Outlawing religion would do more harm than good by actually strengthening religious fervor, the very thing I want to shake. It has to be voluntary.

Religion has never accomplished anything useful that could not be acquired on pragmatic grounds in a secular society. Go ahead and name what it has accomplished that could not have been attained without religion.

[Eupalinos]

Most of the summits of art would not have been attainable in a secular society. Name a text from a predominately secular society to compare with the Iliad, the dialogues of Plato, the Commedia, Hamlet, etc. I could make similar lists for music, painting, architecture and so on. The death of religious feeling has shown itself to be also the death of culture. Let me be clear: I see no way back to genuine religious feeling. I am agnostic too and art can't be bluffed. The pretense of religious feeling is not a replacement for the real thing. We are stuck where we are.

As to the first point: your list of atrocities was fraught with the petty outrage of anthropocentric absorption. You did not reference any consequences of the existence of humans on anything other than humans. And there is a long tradition of blaming the cosmos for what we do to one another, which, yes, I think is indefensibly idiotic, personally; even though it wasn't your main point it was very present in what you wrote.

[HCabret]

You are doing poorly enough that I can simply ignore you now. Anyone who asks me what a Christain is to merely point out a spelling oversight is not worth the effort of a relpy.
This is a literature forum. Correctly spelling words, or at least taking the time to read over your posts before publishing, them is vital to the entire enterprise of this forum (or at least editing them ex post facto). Unlike you, I am not a mind-reader, and can only base my interpretations of what you write on what you have actually written. Words have meaning; if I don't know a word, I tend to ask for clarification. If you choose not to respond to my posts any longer for whatever reason, that is fine, but that will not prevent me from either responding to your posts or to anyone else's posts.

[HCabret]

I think I got it. A species of ape should never lament or moan. To you, this conveniently includes questioning the existence of God. Better not do that, because you are an ape. Instead, we apes should keep praying faster, eh?the existence of which god?


I fully expected squallers. What you really want to do is defend religion, but you are afraid. You are afraid those you can now get support from against my wicked views would abandon you as just another religious "sapster." If you hate atheists, lad, I am the wrong guy. I am an agnostic.Are those you disagree with not allowed to defend any particular religion and/or the concept of religion?


What's his name that I just responded to insinutates I would like to outlaw religion. His insurance was a question mark at the end of his sentence. Outlawing religion would do more harm than good by actually strengthening religious fervor, the very thing I want to shake. It has to be voluntary.What's wrong with "religious fervor"?


Religion has never accomplished anything useful that could not be acquired on pragmatic grounds in a secular society.Which religion?


Go ahead and name what it has accomplished that could not have been attained without religion.which religion?

[Eupalinos]

Since I used the unfortunate phrase 'religious feeling', I want to add to my post above HCabret's last two that I would guess the religions whose works can result in great metaphysics, philosophy, and art-making above all, are based in false reasoning, and NOT irrationalist 'feeling', which is mostly a rearguard action and which I'm ready to believe leads to little except evil.

[desiresjab]

Hey, brains, how many secular societies have their been in the history of the world? You have no argument.

[desiresjab]

Yes, I am so sorry, H, that I misspelled a word. I have undermined the entire forum and no doubt it will now collapse, all due to me and the transposition of two letters. How can I express my grief? How can I adequately express my sorrow to those who have never misspelled? You got me. I think I will just go hang my head.

[HCabret]

Yes, I am so sorry, H, that I misspelled a word. I have undermined the entire forum and no doubt it will now collapse, all due to me and the transposition of two letters. How can I express my grief? How can I adequately express my sorrow to those who have never misspelled? You got me. I think I will just go hang my head.
A little dramatic, don't you think? I was simply expressing my position in favor of properly spelling words, as well as the process of editing one's work before publishing it. Part of this forum's function is to promote practices such as proper spelling and proofreading.

I am sorry if I came across to you as a prick for suggesting that you spell words correctly, but I will continue to advocate for proper spelling in all areas of this forum, regardless of any criticism I may receive for doing so.

[HCabret]

Hey, brains, how many secular societies have their been in the history of the world? You have no argument.
*there. Please try to be less confrontational. This is not a debate forum.

[Eupalinos]

desiresjab, you seem (a) either unwilling or incapable of bearing yourself with dignity in conversation and (b) delusional if you cannot connect the incurrence of pragmatism and skepticism in a society with demonstrable declines in culture.

Everywhere secularism is evident (resurgence of religious extremism being just one response).

Pragmatism, however admirable, is basically sterile. Myths develop and deepen imagination. In a pragmatic world such as you wish for, myths would only be considered useless — useless being also the closest we could then get to a definition of art — and imagination would become fallow. As indeed it has. Where does it exist today in a beautiful form uncorrupted by our almost inescapable onslaught of empty sensual stimuli, driven by the insatiable demand for self-centered gratification? Secularization has nothing to do with it, I suppose. Name anything today with the imaginative rawness and world-embracing temperament of Hesiod’s Work and Days, please. I will run out and read it.

I’m sure you’re a fine person, but no one will find you virtuous by your superiority posturing. If you succeeded in making me feel bad, exploiting a perceived insecurity, afterward I only felt ashamed for the mindset that would give way to such a superfluous nastiness.