Jump to content

God? Part 2


Warrior381
 Share

Recommended Posts

I'm doing this as an additional, as I'm not sure how much time I've got, and if I have to come back to it later, it makes more sense for this to be a seperate post.

 

Okay, to give a couple of quick illustrations as to what I mean about context with regards to Jesus, sex and children.

 

First let's look at those stupid "countdown" sites that existed about the Olsen Twins. They were counting down to the twins' 18th birthday, where the theory was that they would then be "legitimate" to perv over. However, I'm British. The age of consent here is 16. So I could have lusted after them when they were 16, if I'd have had a mind. It wouldn't have made me a paedophile. A dirty old man, for sure, but a paedophile, no. Were I american, though, it would have made me a paedophile, even though there would be nothing different about it at all.

 

Morality is not absulote and we have to examine actions in context of the society in which they were (or potentially were) carried out.

 

For the second illustration, let's talk about slavery, shall we? Jesus condoned slavery. Look at Luke 7, Jesus healed the slave of a Roman officer, and spoke approvingly of the officer. Jesus condoned slavery. Now, in the context of the times, where slavery was commonplace, this is no big shakes. But if you take it in the context of modern Western morality (although almost all countrys of the world condemn slavery these days) it's utterly reprehensible.

 

Do you think Jesus and the Apostles were reprehensible human beings for the fact that they endorsed slavery? Or do you think that they were products of their time? Try thinking about the "sex with children" issue in that light, not with the eyes of a modern man.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 140
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

we know very, very little about Jesus at all.

"We"?

 

You exist in an awefully small world and I want no part of it.

 

As far as any further research on your part, dont bother.

 

You are attempting to justify your remarks, of which there is no justification

 

As far as the rest of your post; It is an insult and I LOVE Jesus. I am NOT going to lower myself to your level of blasphemy.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's always a problem to have rational discourse about matters of religion when the question of blasphemy raises it's head. I would say that it's an impediment to true, objective research, too.

 

But before you get too worked up about blasphemy, consider two things. Firstly, all I've said is that we have no historical reason to deny the possibility. And secondly, you have said that your beliefs would be considered blasphemous by your church. Pretty much any stance on the subject of religious thought will be considered blasphemous by someone else. I will not start censoring what I say or pretending to believe something other than that which I do for fear of causing offence, because then I might as well simply never say anything. Obviously you feel the same way, otherwise you wouldn't share your beliefs, when you know there are those who would find them blasphemous.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You've really outdone yourself on this one, troll. Is your ego comforted? Do you feel protected? Even if you do, it will only be temporary, and you will need to find new victims. I hope, for the sake of your soul, that you someday seek enlightenment and ascension. You will now take your parting shot at me, since your ego always needs to have the last word.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

sooo foolish.

 

does anyone else find language fascinating? imagine if you just felt what another person was trying to convey?

 

these arguments bring you absolutely no where. youre so off the subject that the point of obtaining knowledge on the subject is loooong gone.

 

story of humanity though.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Okay, so I know the boundries of discussion now, at least. Those who believe can say what they want and make fun of and generally disparage those who don't believe, but you'd better not entertain any possible notion about Jesus that doesn't fit in with their world view, otherwise you'll be accused of blasphemy. Of course, to millions of Jews worldwide taking the Kabbalah out of a Jewish context is blasphemous. To millions of Christians worldwide the Kabbalah is magic and therefore evil and blasphemous. To hundreds (maybe thousands) of Branch Davidians, saying that David Koresh was not the Messiah (or a Prophet at the very least) is blasphemy.

 

So is it only bad to blaspheme against the particular version of Christ that some here believe in? Or should we all avoid saying anything because everything is blasphemous to some? Should it be that none of us are allowed to type the word "God", as many Jews find that blasphemous?

 

Seems like a classic case of "one rule of the rich, and one rule for the poor" to me. Shame. I had thought better of this place.

 

Just out of interest, can anyone tell me what the age of consent is, as layed out in the Bible? I must have missed that chapter. And I see that nobody has answered my question about Jesus' stance on slavery. The church's official stance seems to be that what was accpetable in that day and age is not necessarily acceptable nowadays. If the Orthodox Catholic Church can accpet this, then why is it such a hard concept for other to grasp?

 

[Edited to add]Oh, BTW, for those who are either concerned for my soul or gloating for how I've condemned myself, I wouldn't worry, were I you. Jesus has had long and bloody wars fought in His name. He has had people tortured to death over the course of more then a month in his name. He's a big boy, and I suspect he can look after Himself. I honestly don't think he'd be too concerned about an atheist stating the fact that there is little historical documentation of his life, and that that that there is doesn't mention his sex life, and therefore it's not impossible to think that He would have behaved in a manner which was commonplace in the time in which He existed. I think He's probably got enough intestinal fortitude to take that one on the chin and not get his knickers in too much of a twist about it, don't you?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What's the point of having to continue this debates? I have stopped replying to at least 2 debates, reasons being, it is not that I do not have any now answers. But rather a reasoning to actually answer the question non-rhetorically and a roundabout.

 

Also the debates has continually been replied in a very much sardonical tone and mostly is an ego battle instead of seeking answers. What's the point? I rather have an enjoyable debate, make friends instead of typing furiously long answers that make no sense. Now that I know. I am going to reply with more intelligence next time. Also, I have been reading up on books from CS Lewis and am going to post later.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What happened to Beleth is a Bell-end?

I got bored of it. And, as I've had nothing but good luck since I changed it (well, today was a bit of a bummer, but it looks like it's all fine and funky again now) and I didn't know if I'd managed to offend you to the point where you weren't speaking to me any more due to this thread, it felt like time to give it up. I've also just worked out that song on guitar (to be fair, it's not very hard) and have been playing it a fair deal of late, and as it seemed somehow appropriate for the heathen that I am, there it is. I also just think that the lyrics are nifty. It's a nice bit of imagery.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I got bored of it. And, as I've had nothing but good luck since I changed it (well, today was a bit of a bummer, but it looks like it's all fine and funky again now) and I didn't know if I'd managed to offend you to the point where you weren't speaking to me any more due to this thread, it felt like time to give it up. I've also just worked out that song on guitar (to be fair, it's not very hard) and have been playing it a fair deal of late, and as it seemed somehow appropriate for the heathen that I am, there it is. I also just think that the lyrics are nifty. It's a nice bit of imagery.

I was considering the idea of withdrawing, but then realized that I had become bored beyond reason. Even though we have quite abusive debate(s) , the dynamics are filled with alot of energy and provoked a tighter thought process.

 

I had to get a breath of fresh air for a bit before returning to the table.

 

As far as being the Heathen you are, I think this had been established way before this event. :)

 

I was working on a country song long ago. Actually used to "hear' it in dreams sometimes. About a fictional country western singer named Nicky Stroub.

 

Then there is the Mr. Ranger song....

 

" Mr. Ranger, Mr. Ranger,

 

When he's around your lifes in danger...

 

Or even...Floor Surfing...

 

" I stayed up way too late, and had way to much to drink..

 

the floor has begun to move, The carpet has begun to curl

 

Surfs Up! I am floor surfing

 

( The ending of the lyrics..)

 

Wipe Out! Here I lie, on the floor, losing conciousness, my face upon the carpet

 

as my eyes begin to close,

 

I know that I'll be dreaming..

 

Dreaming of Floor Surfing

 

I would have to find the notebook they are written in, since I cant remember the rest of the words to the songs.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Song lyrics Tobor The Eighth man http://www.alphalink.com.au/~roglen/tobor.wav

 

Web site, for Tobor The Eight man http://www.alphalink.com.au/~roglen/tobor.htm

 

Notes, when you first hear the theme song for Tobor, make sure you adjust your hearing to hear Tobor The Eighthman, so you don't think its Tobor The Ape-man?

 

Do his friends call him Tob?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yes I have seen this type of optical illusion--I believe it was the same kind of thing, except it was a picture of Abe Lincoln (unmistakable since photos actually exist). Why everyone thinks Jesus is was a thin large-eyed caucasian-looking guy is irrelevant. Ods are he was dark-skinned and sun-weathered, but he could also have been been short and bald. Not the romantic depiction...

 

Seeing a beautiful artist's rendition of Christ may inspire devotion in some, but it's what was in the heart of Christ that would or would not inspire me. So if he was short and bald (or even Buddhaesque) an optical illusion wouldn't be an effective way to make someone think they were having a religious experience, would it?

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...