Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest
Faithless Christianity?
-
14-07-2009 9:30pm#1
Comments
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
I guess my point is, how did the Christian understanding of heaven and hell and kingdom of God arise.
From previous Jewish teaching in most cases, Daniel, Jeremiah and Isaiah all refer to hell, infact Isaiah refers to a New Earth centuries before John referred to it in Revelations. The Messiah was intended to be a priestly king. The Kingdom of God fulfils this Messianic prophesy.How do we know that the Christian understanding of heaven and hell and god corresponds to Jesus's?
If we consider the New Testament to be the most authentic account concerning Jesus, then it also goes by extension that Jesus' teachings about hell which are attributed to him both in parable and in general speech are likely to be authentic also.Is it the synoptic gospels you refer to as being the most historically correct?
Even John is considered to be authentic:
0 -
-
If we consider the New Testament to be the most authentic account concerning Jesus, then it also goes by extension that Jesus' teachings about hell which are attributed to him both in parable and in general speech are likely to be authentic also.
Thanks for your reply.
But where does Jesus say that Heaven is a place after life as we know it?
Isn't it possible he was referring to death of the ego and mind driven states of being?
Isn't it possible he refers to heaven as an egoless state much akin to the Budda's teachings?
Isn't that possible?Even John is considered to be authentic:
To be honest, i can't see this video doing very much to waiver skeptics.
The Gospel of John is very different to the other three books.
How can all be different?
I'm not questioning the authenticity of the new testament! I'm not a historian.
By the way i'm not trying to prove/disprove anything.
Im genuinelt curious tbh and thanks for your replies!0 -
Advertisement
-
-
-
But where does Jesus say that Heaven is a place after life as we know it?
In numerous passages. Our view of heaven for what it is because of what the Bible has informed us about. It isn't just from Jesus, but from the Apostles. I'm going to deal with both heaven and hell just to clarify everything with examples of each.
Hell is described as a physical location, and Jesus clearly viewed it as a real threat:
Matthew 5:29-30; Luke 3:17; Luke 19:19-31; John 15:6; John 3:18
As was heaven:
Matthew 6:20-21; Matthew 8:11-13; Matthew 16:16-19; Matthew 18:4-5; Mark 10:29-30; John 3:16-17
It's hard to take a view that Jesus was really talking about little else apart from eternal punishment and eternal damnation in these passages.Isn't it possible he was referring to death of the ego and mind driven states of being?
Jesus deals with these in specific passages. Such as your treasure is where your heart is, and to pick up ones cross and follow Him. Given the depictions that Jesus drew up of heaven and hell, it is truly punishment. He called it worse than Sodom and Gomorrah and that entire towns would be condemned for their sinfulness. (Matthew 11:20-24). Jesus was hated because He was offensive, hence why he said "Blessed are those who do not take offence of me" (Matthew 11:6).Isn't it possible he refers to heaven as an egoless state much akin to the Budda's teachings?
Isn't that possible?
I don't think so.To be honest, i can't see this video doing very much to waiver skeptics.
Even if it doesn't it disproves the claims that the Gospel of John is not an authentic book of Scripture when we have historical evidence to say otherwise.The Gospel of John is very different to the other three books.
How can all be different?
When you get 4 people from different perspectives writing about experiences it is likely that some will remember certain experiences over others. The Bible isn't like the Qur'an which is written in a style which is considered to be straight to Muhammad through Gabriel. 1 person, 1 perspective, not done in a narrative, recited as the direct word of God. The Bible is different.
John clearly says in his Gospel that Jesus did many other things when He was with them:John 20:30-31 wrote:Now Jesus did many other signs in the presence of His disciples, which are not written in this book. But these are written so that you may come to believe that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, and that through believing you may have live in His name.
Interesting? The books purpose is to put forward that Jesus is the Messiah, the Son of God, not to put forward that Jesus was merely a moral teacher.By the way i'm not trying to prove/disprove anything.
Im genuinelt curious tbh and thanks for your replies!
That's no problem. However, expect us to deal with your posts with a bit of scrutiny too
0 -
If the OP wants to embrace and discuss the values Christians hold dear, what does it matter that he doesn't 'believe'? It's not like it's his fault, or that he hasn't tried!
If a historical figure has something of value to say and teach - like the OP believes with Jesus - they don't have to be the Son of God to give it worth.
Nobody said he cannot embrace or discuss Christianity. However it would seem a ridiculous notion to describe oneself as a Christian, while at the same time an atheist...
.. talk about having your cake and eating it. Faith is integral to Christianity tbh. It's not that the OP just has an interest in the life of Jesus, but seems to me to be looking for a Godless 'religion' or belief system based on Jesus, which is just contradictory. 0 -
-
Nobody said he cannot embrace or discuss Christianity. However it would seem a ridiculous notion to describe oneself as a Christian, while at the same time an atheist..... talk about having your cake and eating it. Faith is integral to Christianity tbh. It's not that the OP just has an interest in the life of Jesus, but seems to me to be looking for a Godless 'religion' or belief system based on Jesus, which is just contradictory.
It is any more contradictory than people that call themselves Christians that have sex before marrige. Priests that abuse children. There are plenty of A la carte Christians the OP is just looking a Christian like life style organisation without all the smoke and mirrors, blackmagic, witchcraft mumbo jumbo.0 -
-
-
-
Besides, how can there be eternal life on earth, if it is passing away? (Mark 13:31, Matthew 5:17)
In mark he also says heaven will pass away? But eternal life is not meant in the same way. Form will come and go as will you come and go, but if we were unaware of the same fact we would just live like we are supposed too, free from "sin".People from the east and the West will eat with Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob in heaven (Matthew 8). Wait a minute? How can I eat in a place that doesn't exist?
Because they will "eat" of the same thing. Oneness.Such as storing up your treasures in heaven and the like.
/QUOTE]
Yes. Being at one with who you really are. EgolessI.E becoming animals and the like? That would be a desire to add Buddhism to Christianity.
No. Just a simple recognition that the true "spiritual" masters were all pointing to the same thing.but one cannot hold both Christianity to be the absolute truth, and Eastern philosophies to be absolute truth.
No but the absolute truth is they all pointed in the same direction.The view that there is a place for the dead has existed since Judaism. The idea of Sheol was first elaborated upon. In the New Testament text there is Gehenna, Hades, and Heaven. All discussed in the text.
The idea of the supernatural was around a long time before Jesus was born. Before and afterlife and heaven and hell and thousands of other terms.You had all these civilizations prior to Jesus. The ego has been around for just as long almost.
When we gave into greed. We ate from the apple.Why would Jesus say, "I am going away, and you will search for me, but you will die in your sin. Where I am going you cannot come" to the Pharisees? (John 8:21).
Because he knows where he is going. They cannot come because they don't know where they are going.Yet we also see that Jesus says that the robber at his side will see Him in paradise for His faith (Luke 23:43). Again these are used in spatial terms.
Because they both understand the meaning of life.It is inconsistent with the Gospel, previous Jewish revelation, and Apostolic revelation. That's personally why I won't be holding such a view. Others are perfectly entitled to do so.
But that's other peoples views, not yours. Or?The problem with interpreting and reinterpreting is that we could put the Bible in terms which it was never intended to be put in.
Exactly and the only person who knew that was Jesus. So it's really important that the key phrases are understood, and really understand not just what you think the words mean, due to social conditioning.How could it be viewed as life right now? Life right now is finite, not eternal! I don't see how eternal, and finite, could be described using the same terms.
Because now is all we ever have.
How could life right now be finite if life right now is everything? Everything from the air i breathe to the movements of the planet. We are all part of that. That makes us one with it and that is eternal life. But because we are so absorbed in past future and pursuit we miss eternity. One moment, the only thing, god, heaven, call it what you want!Hence we have to take the logical view that if Jesus said the earth was passing away, and that there would be new life, it would have to be somewhere else apart from the earth.
Your starting to sound like an atheist Jakkass All this logic thought!
Why would it have to be somewher apart of this earth. Jesus realised he was part of "it" and therefore he was "it".The same "it" that causes everything.
Why can't that be god?
The holy spirit as Christians say is that realisation.Son of God, begotten not of creation. There is a difference. Adam was created by God, Jesus was begotten by God.
If you take Adam to mean human kind as a species.
If you take God to mean the intrinsic complex working of the universe, from planetary movements to the air that you breath.
Adam/humans was created first by God/process/the answer we are all looking for.
Adam/humans became greedy. Somewhere thay ate of that apple and tasted temptation. We lost our way...
Jesus was the son of god because he knew he was part of it all.0 -
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
It is any more contradictory than people that call themselves Christians that have sex before marrige. Priests that abuse children. There are plenty of A la carte Christians the OP is just looking a Christian like life style organisation without all the smoke and mirrors, blackmagic, witchcraft mumbo jumbo. So he wants a religion, based on Jesus as the Son of God, just without God. Like a BLT, without the lettuce, without the tomato, and with turkey instead of bacon. Well, hang on.... it's not a BLT anymore... 0
-
-
-
In mark he also says heaven will pass away? But eternal life is not meant in the same way. Form will come and go as will you come and go, but if we were unaware of the same fact we would just live like we are supposed too, free from "sin".
This doesn't seem to be the most probable reading of this passage. Jesus says the earth and heaven will pass away most likely based on the literature of Judaism:Isaiah 66:22 wrote:For as the new heavens and the new earth, which I will make, shall remain before me, says the LORD, so shall your descendants and your name remain.Isaiah 65:17 wrote:For I am about to create new heavens and a new earth; the former things shall not be remembered or come to mind.
This is most probably the usage since Jesus quotes this exact same chapter of Isaiah, in Matthew chapter 5.Isaiah 66:1 wrote:Thus says the LORD: Heaven is my throne, and the earth is my footstool;Matthew 5:34-35 wrote:But I say to you, do not swear at all, either by heaven, for it is the throne of God, or by the earth for it is His footstool, or by Jerusalem for it is the city of the great King.Because they will "eat" of the same thing. Oneness.
This is incompatible with the context of the passage:Matthew 8:10-11 wrote:When Jesus heard him, He was amazed and said to those who followed Him, 'Truly I tell you in no one in Israel have I found such faith. I tell you, many will come from east and west and will eat with Abraham, Isaac and Jacob in the Kingdom of Heaven, while the heirs of the Kingdom will be thrown into the outer darkness, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth.' And to the centurion Jesus said, 'Go and let it be done for you according to your faith'. And the servant was healed that hour.
Now it uses spatial language to say that many Gentiles will be in the Kingdom of Heaven with Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, whereas many of the Israelites will not. I don't see how this could be seen to have anything to do with oneness.Yes. Being at one with who you really are. Egoless
I have yet to hear how it is likely that heaven and hell refer to ego based on the Gospels.No. Just a simple recognition that the true "spiritual" masters were all pointing to the same thing.
When the "spiritual masters" contradict eachother. It is quite impossible to make them seem coherent unless it is like a jigsaw puzzle where you are bending the pieces to make them fit where they clearly don't.No but the absolute truth is they all pointed in the same direction.
See above. I don't see how.The idea of the supernatural was around a long time before Jesus was born. Before and afterlife and heaven and hell and thousands of other terms.You had all these civilizations prior to Jesus. The ego has been around for just as long almost.
When we gave into greed. We ate from the apple.
I'm aware of that. Hence why we have the Hebrew Scriptures.Because he knows where he is going. They cannot come because they don't know where they are going.
Where involves a location.Because they both understand the meaning of life.
This is nothing but jigsaw bending though. Where in the passage is this said.But that's other peoples views, not yours. Or?
Some people hold unorthodox views. The vast majority of Christians would not hold them.Exactly and the only person who knew that was Jesus. So it's really important that the key phrases are understood, and really understand not just what you think the words mean, due to social conditioning.
Don't get me started on social conditioning. We base our views on what Jesus most likely meant as a Jewish figure, within Jewish culture. I've already shown you how Jesus' quotes link very closely to the Tanakh and this is by far a more probable explanation than resorting to Buddhism or relative truths which are a modern Western phenomenon.Because now is all we ever have.
This is not the case to Christians or Jesus. It's fruitless to put what we want to be there onto the text. Eternal does not equal finite, but eternity.
finite: bounded or limited in magnitude or spatial or temporal extent
eternal: ageless: continuing forever or indefinitely; "the ageless themes of love and revenge"; "eternal truths"; "life everlasting"; "hell's perpetual ...
How are these views consistent?How could life right now be finite if life right now is everything? Everything from the air i breathe to the movements of the planet. We are all part of that. That makes us one with it and that is eternal life. But because we are so absorbed in past future and pursuit we miss eternity. One moment, the only thing, god, heaven, call it what you want!
Christians do not believe this life is all we have. Other Christian writers have made this clear, and other Jewish writers did too. This is why I would prefer denial rather than trying to fit pieces in where they do not fit.Your starting to sound like an atheist Jakkass All this logic thought!
I've been influenced by them in my numerous exchangesWhy would it have to be somewher apart of this earth. Jesus realised he was part of "it" and therefore he was "it".The same "it" that causes everything.
Why can't that be god?
Think about it. The earth does not exist. A new earth has been created. Where is the old earth that we will continue living on it?The holy spirit as Christians say is that realisation.
Again, I am lost as to how you come to these conclusions apart from making what you want to out of the text rather than what is perceivably there.If you take Adam to mean human kind as a species.
I mean according to the Biblical text. Adam was created. Whereas Jesus was the actual blood and flesh son of God by a virgin birth.If you take God to mean the intrinsic complex working of the universe, from planetary movements to the air that you breath.
That's the problem right there. I take God to be the Creator of the universe, and a being who is actively interested in our lives, and a being whose testament is recorded in divine revelation.Adam/humans was created first by God/process/the answer we are all looking for.
Looking for in what sense?Adam/humans became greedy. Somewhere thay ate of that apple and tasted temptation. We lost our way...
I agree with you here for this little moment :pac:Jesus was the son of god because he knew he was part of it all.
But I end up disagreeing with this notion for afforementioned reasons :P0 -
-
QUOTE=Jakkass;61158244]
This is incompatible with the context of the passage:
[/QUOTE]
I fail to see why.I have yet to hear how it is likely that heaven and hell refer to ego based on the Gospels.
You have the traditional christian view of wording and i have a different.When the "spiritual masters" contradict eachother. It is quite impossible to make them seem coherent unless it is like a jigsaw puzzle where you are bending the pieces to make them fit where they clearly don't.
How do they counderdict each other, Only the interpretation of people who follow different religions differs.
Bending the jigsaw pieces could be applied to all areas of life including religion! Theres nothing wrong with it as long as you are prepared to look at another persons bended jigsaw pieceWhere involves a location.
Not really since it means heaven is now therefore he does not need to go anywahere. So no transportation devices needed
This is nothing but jigsaw bending though.
Everyone bends jigsaw pieces though.This is not the case to Christians or Jesus. It's fruitless to put what we want to be there onto the text.
Why should it be fruitless? Why should i take someone elses word for it?
Who decided the meaning?finite: bounded or limited in magnitude or spatial or temporal extent
eternal: ageless: continuing forever or indefinitely; "the ageless themes of love and revenge"; "eternal truths"; "life everlasting"; "hell's perpetual ...
I never said eternal was finite How could that be?
I said if you live life in the present moment there is no birth and death just life. And that is eternal because that is all there is.
Can you not see the sense in that?
No past/future
>Just now
>eternityChristians do not believe this life is all we have. Other Christian writers have made this clear, and other Jewish writers did too. This is why I would prefer denial rather than trying to fit pieces in where they do not fit.
Why do christians believe what they do? Because 95% of christians i meet have never read the bible. So who's god do they believe in?
Me tooI've been influenced by them in my numerous exchangesThink about it. The earth does not exist. A new earth has been created. Where is the old earth that we will continue living on it?Again, I am lost as to how you come to these conclusions apart from making what you want to out of the text rather than what is perceivably there.
Pot and kettle.....I mean according to the Biblical text. Adam was created. Whereas Jesus was the actual blood and flesh son of God by a virgin birth.
Where does it say actual blood and flesh in the physical sense. Perhaps he was part of the universe and therefore was "blood anf flesh".Looking for in what sense?
"It" :pac:
The thing that drives human beings towards extinction. Our thirst for everthing. Our identity. Our greed. Trying to "find ourselves" or "there's something missing in my life". Or "he makes me complete" WTF
Is that human nature?
Is that evolution?
Is that god?
NO
It's ego: selfishness/gree/hatred/temptation/revenge/anger/happiness/sadnes/relief/betrayal/insecurity/depresstion etc etc etc etc etc etc.
Jesus showed us how to live a life free of ego and live in cimplete inner peace. He realised the seperation between the true self and the ego. He was without "sin" and close to god/his true self.0 -
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Advertisement
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GdoKAtwWbhs
Advertisement