What exactly is Christianity
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
17-06-2014, 08:10 PM (This post was last modified: 17-06-2014 08:28 PM by GirlyMan.)
RE: What exactly is Christianity
(17-06-2014 08:04 PM)childeye Wrote:  
(17-06-2014 07:50 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  You mean it's rhetorical then.
No, I mean how you respond to the Gospel says more about you than it does about Jesus.

Dude, I'm my own personal Jesus who regularly reads The Red Letters for inspiration. Don't mean I'm naive enough to believe in some bullshit promise of a postmortem preservation of identity. That shit's for children.

#sigh
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-06-2014, 08:24 PM
RE: What exactly is Christianity
(17-06-2014 07:02 PM)goodwithoutgod Wrote:  
(17-06-2014 06:52 PM)childeye Wrote:  Wrong. I said the Gospel is about trust. I know what is true. I trust what is true.... I know, word salad.

trust based on the gospels? and who wrote the gospels.....

Acts and luke had the same authors. NO, none of the authors of the gospels knew jesus.

Writings of the Gospels: Mark (60 to 75 CE), Matthew (80 to 90 CE), Luke (80 to 90 CE based on the Gospels of Mark), and John (80 to 110 CE) (Albl 283). I have shown before in various venues the issues with the Gospels, the fact that we don’t know who wrote the gospels, the community effort that put them together, and the fact that they don’t agree with one another, all of which make them a suspect source of empirical evidence. When one posits a super natural, extraordinary story, one requires extraordinary evidence....sadly it doesn't exist, except philosophically.

The Gospel of Matthew is generally believed to have been composed between 70 and 110, with most scholars preferring the period 80–90; a pre-70 date remains a minority view, but has been strongly supported. The anonymous author was probably a highly educated Jew, intimately familiar with the technical aspects of Jewish law, and the disciple Matthew was probably honored within his circle. The author drew on three main sources to compose his gospel: the Gospel of Mark; the hypothetical collection of sayings known as the Q source; and material unique to his own community, called "Special Matthew", or the M source. Note the part where I said...disciple matthew honored...and anonymous writer...do some research. Knowledge is power, and quite liberating.

The gospel of Mark; Most modern scholars reject the tradition which ascribes it to Mark the Evangelist, the companion of Peter, and regard it as the work of an unknown author working with various sources including collections of miracle stories, controversy stories, parables, and a passion narrative.

Luke: Tradition holds that the text was written by Luke the companion of Paul (named in Colossians 4:14). Many modern scholars reject this view, although the list of scholars maintaining authorship by Luke the physician is lengthy, and represents scholars from a wide range of theological opinion. According to Raymond E. Brown, opinion concerning Lukan authorship was ‘about evenly divided’ as of 1997.

John: The gospel identifies its author as "the disciple whom Jesus loved." Although the text does not name this disciple, by the beginning of the 2nd century, a tradition had begun to form which identified him with John the Apostle, one of the Twelve (Jesus' innermost circle). Although some notable New Testament scholars affirm traditional Johannine scholarship, the majority do not believe that John or one of the Apostles wrote it, and trace it instead to a "Johannine community" which traced its traditions to John.

Now this all sounds so familiar, ah, thats right, I made these points before.

Paul also NEVER met jesus. So once again, as I have asserted previously, all writers of jesus, never met him, and wrote these stories based on the oral retelling, of the oral retelling of heresay. Fact. I have a degree in theology for a reason....to be able to dismantle the myth.
I'm sorry you wasted your time writing all this. I was talking about Thee Gospel. As in the Gospel foretold of in the Old Testament. I am not referring to the Gospel according to etc... This might cause you to then ask if I am saying the Gospels found in the bible are not true. I'm not saying that. I am saying that the Gospel was preached by the Christ to begin with. I am saying the Gospel was spread by word of mouth before there was any bible. Also I am saying it doesn't matter who wrote it or spoke it or whether they knew the Christ when he walked the Earth. What matters is whether they know Godly Love and recognize it in the Gospel. Because only people with Godly Love, recognize Godly Love. Hence I would trust the man named Jesus even because he displayed this Godly Love. He is trustworthy.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-06-2014, 08:28 PM
RE: What exactly is Christianity
(16-06-2014 12:28 AM)childeye Wrote:  
(16-06-2014 12:15 AM)evenheathen Wrote:  But what you have to realize is that what you are essentially saying is, "of course you don't believe it, because you don't believe it".

Understanding it is a very broad topic, keep in mind you think that your dog has an eternal soul. It is a very arrogant position to take to think that your understanding of these matters are more correct than millions of other thinkers, and to dismiss their views and understandings simply based on what makes you feel good. I know that arrogance is not something that you would like to attribute to yourself, yet there it is.
Respectfully, you are arriving at conclusions based upon assumptions. I never said anything you have attributed above.

Not in so many words, no. But essentially you have.

(16-06-2014 12:28 AM)childeye Wrote:  Nor do I think my understanding is more correct than millions of other thinkers. I don't even know many thinkers that I would be enabled to dismiss what they think.

Yes you do, that's why you think that you understand it and call it truth. You know many thinkers right here in this forum and dismiss what we think because you believe that you understand the truth more than we do (you would probably use the term "realize" the truth, because of course, we all "know" the truth since god has written it on our hearts....amirite?).

(16-06-2014 12:28 AM)childeye Wrote:  Yes I know Christ personally, and you can say that can't be true based on your discounting the existence of God.

Correction, you believe that you know christ personally. I don't discount the existence of love, however I severely doubt that in any sense of the word, love has anything to do with a supernatural power. It's just too natural to me, and no god or savior is needed for it to exist.

I can get on board with your philosophy of love being the greatest of all things, but as soon as you start using scripture to back that up you lose me completely. You tell me that I can't rely on scripture to prove anything about god, yet when asked about god you go straight to scripture.

It's not that I don't understand "god", it's that I don't understand you. You flip flop all over the place when trying to explain yourself, and that doesn't bode well for your message. You are consistent with your philosophy, I'll give you that. You just can't come to rest on whether or not a christian should be able to trust scripture. It all comes down to "divine revelation". Do you see how frustrating that is? Can you comprehend how that is in fact dismissing most other people in the world who have ever existed who have not had your "understanding" that god and the gospel are not contained in the scriptures, yet the scriptures do indeed tell us about god and the gospel?

(16-06-2014 12:28 AM)childeye Wrote:  But your definition of god is a made up definition which is why you can discount god's existence. Under your definition of god I am an atheist too.

Six to one, half a dozen to another, brother. You're trying to have your already eaten cake.

But now I have come to believe that the whole world is an enigma, a harmless enigma that is made terrible by our own mad attempt to interpret it as though it had an underlying truth.

~ Umberto Eco
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-06-2014, 08:34 PM
RE: What exactly is Christianity
(17-06-2014 08:10 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  
(17-06-2014 08:04 PM)childeye Wrote:  No, I mean how you respond to the Gospel says more about you than it does about Jesus.

Dude, I'm my own personal Jesus who regularly reads The Red Letters for inspiration. Don't mean I'm naive enough to believe in some bullshit promise of a postmortem preservation of identity. That shit's for a children.
It is not naïveté to hope there is a better life than what we experience here.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-06-2014, 08:37 PM
RE: What exactly is Christianity
(17-06-2014 08:34 PM)childeye Wrote:  
(17-06-2014 08:10 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  Dude, I'm my own personal Jesus who regularly reads The Red Letters for inspiration. Don't mean I'm naive enough to believe in some bullshit promise of a postmortem preservation of identity. That shit's for a children.
It is not naïveté to hope there is a better life than what we experience here.

Lucky for you there is a quick way to find out. Angel
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-06-2014, 08:59 PM
RE: What exactly is Christianity
(17-06-2014 08:34 PM)childeye Wrote:  
(17-06-2014 08:10 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  Dude, I'm my own personal Jesus who regularly reads The Red Letters for inspiration. Don't mean I'm naive enough to believe in some bullshit promise of a postmortem preservation of identity. That shit's for a children.
It is not naïveté to hope there is a better life than what we experience here.

It most certainly is. And not only is it the height of naïveté, it is the height of arrogance as well.

#sigh
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-06-2014, 09:34 PM
RE: What exactly is Christianity
(17-06-2014 06:52 PM)childeye Wrote:  
(17-06-2014 11:07 AM)EvolutionKills Wrote:  Translation: He doesn't know they are true, but he really, really, really wants it to be true. And maybe (just maybe) if he believes it hard enough, it will be true. Becuase... reasons... and Jesus...
Wrong. I said the Gospel is about trust. I know what is true. I trust what is true.... I know, word salad.

How do you know they are true? Why do you trust them? Because you really, really, really want to trust them because you really, really, really want them to be true. All you have going for you is desire and ignorance of the facts, so you must forgive the rest of us when we don't find that at all compelling.

Which is no different than any other religious fundamentalist for any other religion and/or sect; which is all faith, zero evidence. We (and yourself) have no more reason to take your 'beliefs' any more seriously than we do the beliefs of Osama Bin Laden, David Koresh, Pat Robertson, Jim Jones, or Saul of Tarsis... Drinking Beverage

[Image: E3WvRwZ.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-06-2014, 10:31 PM (This post was last modified: 17-06-2014 10:35 PM by childeye.)
RE: What exactly is Christianity
(17-06-2014 08:28 PM)evenheathen Wrote:  Not in so many words, no. But essentially you have.
I said my dog has empathy, soul means to breathe, and out of nowhere you claim I've said my dog is immortal. Why don't you just conclude that I said every mouse ever born is immortal? And what spirit did you say that out of? It's a spirit that would seek to discredit me and everything else I say simply because my dog breathes and cares about me. But I still Love you. And I still would have you EEEAT MEEE.

(16-06-2014 12:28 AM)childeye Wrote:  Nor do I think my understanding is more correct than millions of other thinkers. I don't even know many thinkers that I would be enabled to dismiss what they think.

Quote:Yes you do, that's why you think that you understand it and call it truth. You know many thinkers right here in this forum and dismiss what we think because you believe that you understand the truth more than we do (you would probably use the term "realize" the truth, because of course, we all "know" the truth since god has written it on our hearts....amirite?).
Oh please, stop. Your reasoning simply concludes that if I disagree, I think I know more, therefore I am arrogant. I don't dismiss what you think out of hand. I listen, I consider, and I point out the discrepancies in an attempt at honest discourse. I wouldn't mention God's Word written on your heart. Such a thing is done by grace. But if it is, I don't see what's wrong with getting someone to realize it.

(16-06-2014 12:28 AM)childeye Wrote:  Yes I know Christ personally, and you can say that can't be true based on your discounting the existence of God.

Quote:Correction, you believe that you know christ personally. I don't discount the existence of love, however I severely doubt that in any sense of the word, love has anything to do with a supernatural power. It's just too natural to me, and no god or savior is needed for it to exist.
Fine, I believe I know Christ personally, since I wasn't born when he was walking the earth. Still, I know his Spirit personally. Otherwise I couldn't trust in him. Love is a natural phenomenon which is all the more reason it comes from the maker whatever or whoever that would be. It is not like pooping or peeing which is also natural. The whole point of vanity is that people take God's attributes as their own which leaves them unthankful. There is a spiritual difference between the man who is thankful for his Love and those who take it for granted. They tend to make false images of god and worship themselves.

Quote:I can get on board with your philosophy of love being the greatest of all things, but as soon as you start using scripture to back that up you lose me completely. You tell me that I can't rely on scripture to prove anything about god, yet when asked about god you go straight to scripture.

There are semantics here. Yes I don't use scripture as proof of God. The bible is not proof of God. It does not attempt to prove God. It is testimony about God. I use scripture to verify the same experiences I have in my life with God. The simple fact is, if God existed He would be before all things temporal or created. There is no way to prove something is eternal from a temporal existence. Anyone who says prove to me God exists, doesn't know what God means.
Quote:It's not that I don't understand "god", it's that I don't understand you. You flip flop all over the place when trying to explain yourself, and that doesn't bode well for your message. You are consistent with your philosophy, I'll give you that. You just can't come to rest on whether or not a christian should be able to trust scripture. It all comes down to "divine revelation". Do you see how frustrating that is? Can you comprehend how that is in fact dismissing most other people in the world who have ever existed who have not had your "understanding" that god and the gospel are not contained in the scriptures, yet the scriptures do indeed tell us about god and the gospel?
That isn't my fault. There are semantics that exist in language. Ten people can hear or read something and get ten different connotations. The books are translated by someone. How exact are the translations to the original sentiments? There are people who call the bible the Word, when in fact the bible declares it is not the word. Please note: In the beginning was the Word. The Word was with God and the Word was God. All things were created through the Word. The Word was the light and the life of man. The Word was made flesh. Then Jesus says, go look in the scriptures in which you think you have eternal Life for they all testify to me. Now are the scriptures the Word of God? Because Jesus implies there is no eternal life in them. He is however referring to those books called the Old Testament.

Now I never said the Gospel was not in the scriptures. I said it was spoken before it was ever written, lest anyone think I am talking about the scriptures called the gospels when I say the Gospel... Everything written in the gospels is not the Gospel. The parts that speak about the Gospel in the gospels is the Gospel. Hint: In the gospels Jesus is seen preaching about the Kingdom of God. He does this in parables. Hence the Gospel is contained in the gospels. But there are things that are contained in some gospels that are not contained in others. Talk about semantics. The bible is loaded with semantics. Paul says, "We preach the Gospel of Christ". Now does this mean the Gospel is about Christ, or does he mean they preach the same Gospel as Christ? Jesus himself said you must have the Holy Spirit to understand the scriptures. So don't say I flip flop because a person needs divine revelation.

Know this. If God created the universe, He knows how to put forth scriptures that resist the understanding of the proud, and that is what the Gospel does. The Holy Spirit testifies about God. Anyone who searches the scriptures to prove God doesn't exist, cannot have the guidance of the holy Spirit Who testifies to God.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-06-2014, 10:37 PM
RE: What exactly is Christianity
(17-06-2014 08:59 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  
(17-06-2014 08:34 PM)childeye Wrote:  It is not naïveté to hope there is a better life than what we experience here.

It most certainly is. And not only is it the height of naïveté, it is the height of arrogance as well.
Hope is not arrogance either.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
17-06-2014, 10:48 PM
RE: What exactly is Christianity
(17-06-2014 10:37 PM)childeye Wrote:  
(17-06-2014 08:59 PM)GirlyMan Wrote:  It most certainly is. And not only is it the height of naïveté, it is the height of arrogance as well.
Hope is not arrogance either.

Fool's errand. Quixotic effort tilting at windmills.

#sigh
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: