Christian God theme debunked.

The world is as we perceive it because we insist on it. My take is that insistence has no basis for being, based on a lie, an arbitrary scramble. Forgive them they Know not what they do.

If you insist on it, believe without doubt, then you can cause a mountain to pick itself up and throw itself into the sea. I once was talking to an older authority figure who told me that the sun revolved around the earth, when I objected I was punished for disputing their word.

 

Obviously analogy is lost on you.

Ok, a quick synopsis here.
Storch you asked;

To which I offered the most succinct avenue to understanding "how that works", the Old Testament laws, prophecies, etc. that explain
"how that works".
You apparently are not interested in understanding from the most logical starting point, within the specific religions cultural context.
Well you can spout opinion all day long and ponder all you want, but you did ask a specific question to which I offered a good starting point, the law of the kinsman redeemer.
In understanding that law and how Jesus was the "kinsman redeemer" for humanity, then many of the silliness that you and Greatest have been spouting about "God murdering his son" becomes evident as stupid in the context of the culture and the religion.
The kinsman redeemer is a person, a blood relative, hence the whole "god in the flesh as man" thing, who assumes the liability for a debt if the relative in question is unable to pay the debt. Hence Jesus willingly going to the cross, he was abiding by the law of the kinsman redeemer, not being sent to be murdered by daddy.

Now lets consider your attitude towards history.
Do you apply the same mentality to all history or just things you know nothing about? Saying that we can't rely on what is written in the Bible because it is a couple thousand years old is, well asinine. Then I guess we had better toss out a whole shit ton of "facts" we accept daily because they were recorded a long time ago.
You appear to lack any formal education in doing research and are even less adept at drawing conclusions.

You claim to want to engage in a debate on these topics, yet can not comprehend that Hip Forums is far, far from a neutral arena in which to conduct such debates, and that anyone adopting your stance is already at a decided advantage from the beginning.
If you can't comprehend that then I'm wondering how you manage to tie your shoes in the morning.

Then you seem to think that just throwing out ludicrous remarks intentionally designed to "start something", offering absolutely NOTHING in the way of supporting documentation, facts, suffices as "debunking".
You offer nothing, except your ill-informed opinions.

Lets also consider those inflammatory remarks by you in this thread as well as the vast majority of posts, threads and even all the stickies by mods in the Christian forums and you a******s have the gall to accuse the Christians here of being "hostile"
LOL LOL LOL LOL !!! :rofl:



Storch you keep wanting me and others to give you a one liner about the hows' why's of the crucifixion.
Sorry that's not possible. It permeates the scriptures in every facet, from obvious foreshadowing events, such as Abraham offering Issac, to the measurements and materials used in the construction of Temple.
In reality all of the Old Testament points the way and leads up to the advent of Jesus, so to accurately and fully answer your question would require a more in depth investigation than can be conducted here or than you would most likely be interested in.
If you can't accept that, oh well.


I will say I am rather surprised that MVW actually thinks you have provided anything worthy of any type of accolade.

MVW, I have lost a bit of respect for you if you accept what Storch has offered here as being anything more than juvenile and simplistic comprehension and conclusions.

Surely with your obvious degree of reading and comprehending these topics, you see my point.
If not,...

 

Storch is a creative writer/thinker and a sincere friend.

It is not his job to be my friend, that is he must meet no standard for me. I like friendly people.

The same is true of me for NoxiousGas.

Finding accord in myself among all of us I find it comical all the same intelligently entertaining, that you two struggle to find balance in each other as you are moved by each other.

 

??? then you don't consider yourself a Christian I suppose?

The resurrection is the only defining characteristic of the entire religion.
Even Jesus himself said as much when asked what sign to show he's the Messiah.
Everything hinges on the resurrection, any fool can get himself crucified and die.
The resurrection or divinity of Jesus has been the divisive factor amongst differing "factions" of Christendom since the beginning.
If you look through the history of the church, those have always been at the forefront of contention.
Fitting considering those are really the only criteria presented in the New Testament to define a believer, is Jesus divine and did he resurrect himself?
All other questions fall to the wayside in comparison.
It is pointed out rather clearly many times in the New Testament, so I am always puzzled by persons professing Christianity yet don't accept the resurrection.

I mean if a person is going to profess a belief in certain faith/religion, doesn't it sound kind of lame to then pick and choose what aspects of it you are in agreement with?

Oh well, buffet religion I guess, take what tastes good and pleasant and leave behind what makes you uncomfortable.


and no, it's not blind faith, actually the entire concept of blind faith doesn't mesh with the Biblical concept of faith, but that's another topic.
It's the idea that to denounce the resurrection, you have essentially said you are not a Christian, so why continue to wear the label?

 

I just got no patience for people spouting proclamations on topics they obviously know very little about.

 

But you have time to complain about it? Is there something you want him to know you could offer it straight up. What you don't have patience for is beating the bitch into submission, the bitch will never submit! Patience brings immediate results.

 

In reality there was nothing to concede sister. As I said the knowledge is there. Obviously you are not a knowledge seeker and that is fine. This should be a discussion, therefore nothing should be conceded and no victory should be sought. If you wish a debate then find someone who is more on your level. I seek knowledge not fallacy.

 

Yup, as I was typing it I thought, "great, now I have to put up with Storch even more" .

I'm not concerned with beating anyone into submission, just annoyed at the stupidity of these types of exchanges.
and you possess enough knowledge concerning these things to know that the references I pointed to are a valid answer to the original question posed within the cultural context of the religions in question.
No need to get all mystical and mysterious about it.

 

At Noxious Gas.....You do realize that you are only espousing opinion my friend. Nothing you have said about Christianity can be cemented with fact. Facts are impossible to come by when referring to the Bible in the way that you do. Accept that your opinion is yours and that all others are theirs or go get some actual facts

 

No I'm not espousing opinion when YOU can go and look up any references I have made.
I have not proffered any interpretation of scriptures, simply that there is a plethora of information/links/clues to the whole Jesus situation in the Old Testament and if Storch really wants to understand it, that is probably the best starting point.
Never said it was the final ending point, but in order to understand something so deeply rooted in a specific culture, don't you think it valuable to understand it from that viewpoint?

I'm just trying to present simple, basic research methodologies, here, that's all.

I have not made any type of proclamations as to truth as Storch has attempted, merely pointing out the flaws in his methodology and subsequent conclusions.
If you feel I have made any such sweeping and final proclamations as others have relating to the topic, please do point it out to me.
The only proclamation I have made is that Storch does not posses the knowledge concerning the topic to proffer such conclusions as he has.

Again that any of you accept what he has put forth as worthwhile just completely baffles me.

 

When we see christ we shall be like him. My religion doesn't like me!

.
Then the crucifixion must be meaningful only on those terms.

He didn't denounce the resurrection. The last supper was an occult ritual. The mind that is in christ comes upon remembrance. There is nothing you do in this life that is not for the body. In all that you do for the body remember me. The cup is the chalice of the heart and in every devotion remember me.

 

Agree, but I believe he was raised as a life giving spirit.

 

remember in Catholic grade school, kid took wiffle ball bat, behind both his arms and was saying "crucified" in a addams famliy lurch voice. nun grabs bat from him whacks him in the back.. lol. oh the memories..

 

Fine, but that isn't what is presented in the New Testament is it?
It makes it pretty clear that he was physically resurrected.

Now whether you accept or believe those accounts is an entirely different matter, but according to the record available to us, it was a literal physical resurrection.

This does illustrate what I said earlier about people wanting a buffet religion rather well though;

"Oh, I like the way that sounds, but that part makes me a little uncomfortable or I've never seen it myself, so I'll pick one from column A and one from C and lets just skip E, D, F and finish off with a sprinkle of Z and a touch of Buddhism for some contrast."




PLEASE DO TAKE NOTICE EVERYONE!!!!

I SAID ACCORDING TO THE RECORDS AVAILABLE TO US....

now if any of you want to run with this and start making even more assumptions about what Nox does or doesn't think/believe, go right ahead, but you'll be mistaken I assure you.

 

When St. Paul was asked about the resurrection of the physical body in 1 Corinthians 15 his response was "how foolish!" What is sown is not the body that will be.

 

The section you are referring to Paul is addressing the topic of the resurrection of believers, not Jesus. please have another look at it and remember to consider it within the context of the entire dialogue.

So, sure, if you ignore all that precedes it in that chapter;

15 Now, brothers, I must remind you of the Good News which I proclaimed to you, and which you received, and on which you have taken your stand, 2 and by which you are being saved — provided you keep holding fast to the message I proclaimed to you. For if you don’t, your trust will have been in vain. 3 For among the first things I passed on to you was what I also received, namely this: the Messiah died for our sins, in accordance with what the Tanakh says; 4 and he was buried; and he was raised on the third day, in accordance with what the Tanakh says; 5 and he was seen by Kefa, then by the Twelve; 6 and afterwards he was seen by more than five hundred brothers at one time, the majority of whom are still alive, though some have died. 7Later he was seen by Ya‘akov, then by all the emissaries; 8 and last of all he was seen by me, even though I was born at the wrong time. 9 For I am the least of all the emissaries, unfit to be called an emissary, because I persecuted the Messianic Community of God. 10 But by God’s grace I am what I am, and his grace towards me was not in vain; on the contrary, I have worked harder than all of them, although it was not I but the grace of God with me. 11 Anyhow, whether I or they, this is what we proclaim, and this is what you believed.
12 But if it has been proclaimed that the Messiah has been raised from the dead, how is it that some of you are saying there is no such thing as a resurrection of the dead? 13 If there is no resurrection of the dead, then the Messiah has not been raised; 14 and if the Messiah has not been raised, then what we have proclaimed is in vain; also your trust is in vain; 15 furthermore, we are shown up as false witnesses for God in having testified that God raised up the Messiah, whom he did not raise if it is true that the dead are not raised. 16 For if the dead are not raised, then the Messiah has not been raised either; 17 and if the Messiah has not been raised, your trust is useless, and you are still in your sins. 18 Also, if this is the case, those who died in union with the Messiah are lost. 19 If it is only for this life that we have put our hope in the Messiah, we are more pitiable than anyone.
20 But the fact is that the Messiah has been raised from the dead, the firstfruits of those who have died. 21 For since death came through a man, also the resurrection of the dead has come through a man. 22 For just as in connection with Adam all die, so in connection with the Messiah all will be made alive. 23 But each in his own order: the Messiah is the firstfruits; then those who belong to the Messiah, at the time of his coming; 24 then the culmination, when he hands over the Kingdom to God the Father, after having put an end to every rulership, yes, to every authority and power. 25 For he has to rule until he puts all his enemies under his feet. 26 The last enemy to be done away with will be death, 27 for “He put everything in subjection under his feet.”[a] But when it says that “everything” has been subjected, obviously the word does not include God, who is himself the one subjecting everything to the Messiah. 28 Now when everything has been subjected to the Son, then he will subject himself to God, who subjected everything to him; so that God may be everything in everyone.


So, I guess just pick one from column A and one from column C.

Buffet Religion.....
I think I may start my own church.

 

I never said I didn't think he was raised. That is critical imo. Check out verse 35.

 

Sorry, edited it after you posted.
The section you are referring to Paul is talking about the resurrection of the believers, not Jesus.
Read the entire chapter and in order to maintain the context of the dialogue forget about verse divisions.

 

It can be interpreted that way, but I look at Christ's resurrection as the prototype for everyone else. The first Adam is a living being and the last Adam a life giving spirit.

 

Sure, so that's one from column A, one from C and one from L.
Would like any critical reading skills on the side with that?