|
Post by Sarge on Jan 5, 2023 20:38:06 GMT
A hippie, cult leader.
|
|
strawdawg
New Member
@deborahann
Posts: 43
Likes: 23
|
Post by strawdawg on Jan 5, 2023 22:19:51 GMT
Possibly none of the above.
|
|
|
Post by Winter_King on Jan 6, 2023 10:04:35 GMT
I'm a little suspicious of his hatred towards fig trees and the racist undertones of the Good Samaritan parable. I do like his respect for secularism.
|
|
The Lost One
Junior Member
@lostkiera
Posts: 2,670
Likes: 1,295
|
Post by The Lost One on Jan 6, 2023 10:17:33 GMT
I'm a little suspicious of his hatred towards fig trees Hey, that fig tree started it!
|
|
djorno
Sophomore
@djorno
Posts: 322
Likes: 81
|
Post by djorno on Jan 6, 2023 11:21:30 GMT
I'm a little suspicious of his hatred towards fig trees and the racist undertones of the Good Samaritan parable. I do like his respect for secularism. Your post is kinda baffling. Could you clarify ?
|
|
|
Post by Winter_King on Jan 6, 2023 12:12:39 GMT
I'm a little suspicious of his hatred towards fig trees and the racist undertones of the Good Samaritan parable. I do like his respect for secularism. Your post is kinda baffling. Could you clarify ? The first part is mostly joking and a reference to this: As for the second part. I've always interpreted the phrase of "render unto Caesar" as a implicit endorsement for the separation of Church and State.
|
|
|
Post by NJtoTX on Jan 10, 2023 13:48:22 GMT
"Modern Christianity mostly revolves around the teachings of Saint Paul, and not Jesus. The central creeds of Institutional Christianity contain little or no teachings of Jesus. Christianity is not the fault of Jesus.
Jesus and Paul would have not gotten along well, and Jesus would have been dismayed by many of the concepts that Paul devised. No other individual shaped the Jesus story that morphed into orthodox Christianity more than Paul. Western Christianity is Pauline. Paul wrote his letters before the gospels were written, and likely influenced the synoptic gospel writers. Jesus would have been dumbfounded by the mythology and theology that got attached to his name.
One thing Paul did very successfully, and in my view very unfortunately, was lock in the idea of atonement and bloodshed as salvific. The Jewish sacrifice of the lamb became the model for the Roman execution of Jesus who became the "lamb of God," who died to take the rap for the sins of all humankind. The earliest followers of Jesus did not go about making crucifixes. The first carved cross doesn't appear until the 7th century. In essence, Paul the prime architect of Christian doctrine, turned Christianity into Cross-tianity.
I see great value and benefit to the biblical stories about the life and teachings of Jesus and the emergence and evolution of Christianity. However, in my view, it cannot be properly understood and appreciated without taking into account the factors that influenced and shaped it.
Paul's letters in the New Testament were basically responses to questions and concerns that the earliest Christian communities posed to him, trying to sort out their beliefs and practices. You might ask, "Who died and made Paul pope?" Doesn't matter, Paul found himself in the regrettable situation of being the expert on how to do Christianity. Keep in mind, Paul did not do this in a vacuum. He had been influenced and conditioned by his own previous religious training, and would have drawn upon these and other factors as the raw materials from which to devise his theology. All things considered, I don't think any of us would have done any better. A lot of Paul's insights and ways he put things together have great value in different ways, but the fact that we assume that Paul was somehow channeling God in his ideas and writings is our fault and not his.
It makes complete sense why Paul did what he did, and he should not be faulted for this. The burden is on us to apply critical thinking and a thorough investigation of the historical, cultural and personal factors that influence and shape all religion, including Christianity. A basic principle of this mindset is "consider the source," which says that it is wise to consider all the factors that would have impacted and influenced the information and views presented by a particular source, in this case, Paul. Since Paul is the most influential figure in the conception of Christianity and Christian doctrine, it's wise to understand Paul in this sense. One can appreciate the contribution of Paul without deifying his writings.
I find it curious that practically every creed of the Church, whether the early ecumenical creeds, the Roman Catholic creeds or the Protestant creeds are statements that outline the theological positions and doctrines of the Church, but hardly have any of the teaching of Jesus in them.
A person doesn't have to be a Paul-hater. He was doing the best he could. Have a little compassion. How would Paul have known that scratching out letters to help sort out the challenges and problems of the early church were somehow going to be turned into the infallible Word of God for all humankind. That's on us, not him. Paul did the best he could given the circumstances and where he was at in his own spiritual journey and evolution.
One should look upon Christian theology with some skepticism given that you can't hardly find Jesus anywhere in it. We painted Jesus white and dressed him up in Christian theology, but the brown-skinned, Middle Eastern Jew who turned religion on its head, got lost some 2,000 years ago on the dusty roads of Nazareth."
- Jim Palmer
|
|
|
Post by lunda2222 on Jan 20, 2023 21:49:05 GMT
Honestly, I have serious doubt if he ever existed. But if he did exist he was most likely a charlatan or scam artist. A modern equivalent would probably be Peter Poppof. Or If I would be in a more charitable mind, he was maybe striving towards independence from the Roman rule, which place him somewhere between Mahatma Ghandi to Osama Bin Laden. Probably closer to Bin Laden given the struggle would certainly not have been non-violent regardless of what the Bible say and because he heavily used religion to obtain his goals. Which brings me to the (heavily sanitized) character in the Bible. That character I have nothing against.
|
|
|
Post by paulslaugh on Jan 20, 2023 22:43:53 GMT
Honestly, I have serious doubt if he ever existed. But if he did exist he was most likely a charlatan or scam artist. A modern equivalent would probably be Peter Poppof. Or If I would be in a more charitable mind, he was maybe striving towards independence from the Roman rule, which place him somewhere between Mahatma Ghandi to Osama Bin Laden. Probably closer to Bin Laden given the struggle would certainly not have been non-violent regardless of what the Bible say and because he heavily used religion to obtain his goals. Which brings me to the (heavily sanitized) character in the Bible. That character I have nothing against. Maybe Jesus was a zealot before he took the non-violence approach. But he was not concerned with the present world, but preparing the 1st c. Jews for the end of the world.
|
|
|
Post by captainbryce on Jan 24, 2023 18:59:36 GMT
This is a question aimed solely for non-believers. What do you think of the character Jesus Christ? Do you think he was a good person/moral teacher ? Are you indifferent towards him? Hate him? I hate him about as much as I hate Sauron, Voldemort, or Emperor Palpatine. None of them are real, so “hate” applies in the fantasy sense only. They are terrible characters, but nothing that evokes an emotional response outside of the fiction.
|
|
djorno
Sophomore
@djorno
Posts: 322
Likes: 81
|
Post by djorno on Jan 24, 2023 22:53:27 GMT
This is a question aimed solely for non-believers. What do you think of the character Jesus Christ? Do you think he was a good person/moral teacher ? Are you indifferent towards him? Hate him? I hate him about as much as I hate Sauron, Voldemort, or Emperor Palpatine. None of them are real, so “hate” applies in the fantasy sense only. They are terrible characters, but nothing that evokes an emotional response outside of the fiction. Sauron, Voldemort and Emperor Palpatine are intended fictional characters though. The Jesus of the bible is at the very least based on a historic person. With a lot of corroborative evidence that supports the narrative so I’d say that’s a bit of a faulty comparison.
|
|
|
Post by captainbryce on Jan 26, 2023 11:47:37 GMT
I hate him about as much as I hate Sauron, Voldemort, or Emperor Palpatine. None of them are real, so “hate” applies in the fantasy sense only. They are terrible characters, but nothing that evokes an emotional response outside of the fiction. Sauron, Voldemort and Emperor Palpatine are intended fictional characters though. The Jesus of the bible is at the very least based on a historic person. With a lot of corroborative evidence that supports the narrative so I’d say that’s a bit of a faulty comparison. You can say whatever you want to say. I believe they are ALL fictional characters. And just because the inventor of Jesus (Paul) intended for his invention to be “believed” doesn’t mean it’s rooted in fact. It’s still an invented character. Author JK Rowling’s intent was to make money by entertaining people. Author St. Paul’s intent was to increase his power by manipulating people. Both of them accomplished their goals.
|
|
|
Post by clusium on Jan 26, 2023 15:18:30 GMT
Sauron, Voldemort and Emperor Palpatine are intended fictional characters though. The Jesus of the bible is at the very least based on a historic person. With a lot of corroborative evidence that supports the narrative so I’d say that’s a bit of a faulty comparison. You can say whatever you want to say. I believe they are ALL fictional characters. And just because the inventor of Jesus (Paul) intended for his invention to be “believed” doesn’t mean it’s rooted in fact. It’s still an invented character. Author JK Rowling’s intent was to make money by entertaining people. Author St. Paul’s intent was to increase his power by manipulating people. Both of them accomplished their goals. There's just one problem, captainbryce. St. Paul (whose feast day was just yesterday) was not the only person to preach the Gospel (& in numerous foreign lands). St. Thomas even travelled all the way out to India to preach the Gospel. In case you forget, St. Paul started out by trying to kill off the new Jewish sect that was centred upon the Lord Jesus. All of the Apostles - St. Paul included - were persecuted & with the noted exception of St. John, were martyred for their testimony.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 26, 2023 15:42:31 GMT
I think he's an alright guy 👍
|
|
|
Post by Sarge on Jan 26, 2023 17:31:33 GMT
You can say whatever you want to say. I believe they are ALL fictional characters. And just because the inventor of Jesus (Paul) intended for his invention to be “believed” doesn’t mean it’s rooted in fact. It’s still an invented character. Author JK Rowling’s intent was to make money by entertaining people. Author St. Paul’s intent was to increase his power by manipulating people. Both of them accomplished their goals. There's just one problem, captainbryce . St. Paul (whose feast day was just yesterday) was not the only person to preach the Gospel (& in numerous foreign lands). St. Thomas even travelled all the way out to India to preach the Gospel. In case you forget, St. Paul started out by trying to kill off the new Jewish sect that was centred upon the Lord Jesus. All of the Apostles - St. Paul included - were persecuted & with the noted exception of St. John, were martyred for their testimony. You don't have a reliable source for that.
|
|
|
Post by clusium on Jan 26, 2023 17:43:39 GMT
There's just one problem, captainbryce . St. Paul (whose feast day was just yesterday) was not the only person to preach the Gospel (& in numerous foreign lands). St. Thomas even travelled all the way out to India to preach the Gospel. In case you forget, St. Paul started out by trying to kill off the new Jewish sect that was centred upon the Lord Jesus. All of the Apostles - St. Paul included - were persecuted & with the noted exception of St. John, were martyred for their testimony. You don't have a reliable source for that. A source for which one? That St. Thomas travelled all the way out to India to preach the Gospel? The Indian Orthodox would be the very first to tell you that he did. St. Thomas In India
|
|
|
Post by Sarge on Jan 26, 2023 18:00:31 GMT
You don't have a reliable source for that. A source for which one? That St. Thomas travelled all the way out to India to preach the Gospel? The Indian Orthodox would be the very first to tell you that he did. St. Thomas In IndiaAT&T flagged the page as malware and won't let me open it. I don't know the page is safe so I'm not going to bypass the warning. Tourist pages or whatever that is, aren't reliable sources either. You can't take things as gospel unless they can be supported by additional historic records.
|
|
|
Post by clusium on Jan 26, 2023 19:05:24 GMT
A source for which one? That St. Thomas travelled all the way out to India to preach the Gospel? The Indian Orthodox would be the very first to tell you that he did. St. Thomas In IndiaAT&T flagged the page as malware and won't let me open it. I don't know the page is safe so I'm not going to bypass the warning. Tourist pages or whatever that is, aren't reliable sources either. You can't take things as gospel unless they can be supported by additional historic records. Okay, try this one then. The Malankara Orthodox Syrian Church
|
|
The Lost One
Junior Member
@lostkiera
Posts: 2,670
Likes: 1,295
|
Post by The Lost One on Jan 26, 2023 19:34:00 GMT
This is a question aimed solely for non-believers. What do you think of the character Jesus Christ? Do you think he was a good person/moral teacher ? Are you indifferent towards him? Hate him? I hate him about as much as I hate Sauron, Voldemort, or Emperor Palpatine. None of them are real, so “hate” applies in the fantasy sense only. They are terrible characters, but nothing that evokes an emotional response outside of the fiction. What is it about Jesus that you would consider him as villainous as those three? Not arguing, just curious.
|
|
|
Post by Sarge on Jan 26, 2023 23:04:25 GMT
AT&T flagged the page as malware and won't let me open it. I don't know the page is safe so I'm not going to bypass the warning. Tourist pages or whatever that is, aren't reliable sources either. You can't take things as gospel unless they can be supported by additional historic records. Okay, try this one then. The Malankara Orthodox Syrian ChurchAnother website. Still doesn't solve the problem of not having reliable sources.
|
|