Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 60 (9208 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: Skylink
Post Volume: Total: 919,430 Year: 6,687/9,624 Month: 27/238 Week: 27/22 Day: 9/9 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Jesus: Why I believe He was a failure.
Iblis
Member (Idle past 4145 days)
Posts: 663
Joined: 11-17-2005


Message 16 of 427 (540035)
12-21-2009 6:10 PM
Reply to: Message 15 by slevesque
12-21-2009 5:28 PM


Re: Jesus, Interrupted
This question at AIG is super-funny
D.O. writes:
Mary may well be a descendant of David, but she can’t pass David’s Y-DNA to Jesus. Mary can only provide half of Jesus’ DNA; her mother's St. Anne’s mtDNA. Women don’t possess the male Y-DNA. David’s Y-DNA is passed only to the male line. Joseph, of course, did not pass his Y-DNA on to Jesus. How can Jesus inherit
Allowing for the VB, how does he have a Y chromosome at all? Did he get his the same place Adam did? Did Adam even have one? After all "he" gives birth to Eve.
Anyway Mark deals with this whole argument a totally different way.
Mark 12:35-37 writes:
And Jesus answered and said, while he taught in the temple, How say the scribes that Christ is the Son of David?
For David himself said by the Holy Ghost, The LORD said to my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand, till I make thine enemies thy footstool.
David therefore himself calleth him Lord; and whence is he [then] his son? And the common people heard him gladly.
The citation is from Psalm 110, from whence also comes this gem
Psalm 110:4 writes:
The LORD hath sworn, and will not repent, Thou [art] a priest for ever after the order of Melchizedek.
Moral: neither a Davidian nor a Levite be ...

This message is a reply to:
 Message 15 by slevesque, posted 12-21-2009 5:28 PM slevesque has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 17 by slevesque, posted 12-21-2009 6:27 PM Iblis has replied

  
Iblis
Member (Idle past 4145 days)
Posts: 663
Joined: 11-17-2005


Message 18 of 427 (540047)
12-21-2009 7:06 PM
Reply to: Message 17 by slevesque
12-21-2009 6:27 PM


Re: Jesus, Interrupted
Right, see what I can do.
A) The questioner has some bad ideas about DNA, acquired from the popular press. We don't get just our "Y-dna" from our father, we get half a set of chromosomes for our nucleus pairs altogether. We don't just get our "mtDNA" from our mother, we get the other half of our chromosomes for our nucleus pairs, plus a complete mitochondrion.
The confusion comes from the fact that there is one chromosome that must pass from father to son, the Y, because Mom doesn't have one, she is XX where men are XY. If the half of that pair the father contributes happens to be his X, a daughter is born. The Y is a little stunty thing, useful only for developing particular male-only attributes.
In the same way the DNA in the mitochondria must pass from mother to child, as the father doesn't contribute any. But the mother contributes a lot more than that, half a nucleus worth. She simply can't contribute a Y chromosome though, as she doesn't have one, unless she's some sort of hermaphrodite.
Which leads to the part I found really funny, above and beyond arguing about DNA in a first-century setting, which is: where did he get his, then? His particular male-only attributes, the ones men get due to the Y chromosome of their fathers, where did they come from?
To paraphrase a certain admiral: "Excuse me... Excuse me... I just wanted to ask a question. What does 'God' need with a Y-chromosome?"
B) Jesus deals with the whole question about paternal descent from David in the passage I cited by proving that David worshipped the Messiah while still alive, in the Psalms, so he couldn't possibly be his son. The common folk eat it up, because they are sick to death of silly inbred Habsburg types wandering by going "Hello, line of David here, clean my boots with your tongue, peasant" and so forth.
C) The same psalm, as later quoted in Hebrews, also deals with another big-deal Jewish bloodline, the Levitical priesthood, making the Messiah instead a type of an older priesthood, that of the king that Abraham paid tithes to. All royal, all priestly, no inbreeding required, this year only at Messiah Dot Com !!!
D) Don't you know this stuff already? It's not a secret.
E) Just to confine the OT to the one post, mitochondria are a particular species of ricketsia that infected the common ancestor of all Eukaryotes (us, sheep, bugs, amoebae, nearly everything you can think of other than bacteria) and have lived inside us ever since. They store energy for us and help us manipulate it, and in return we feed them and keep them safe from the wide world.
In the Star Wars prequels George Lucas calls them "midichlorians". They are the reality behind The Force, and pass only through the maternal line. They are really parasites though, which is why The Dark Side is stronger.
Edited by Iblis, : no question about it, Kirk would kill the Force in 44 minutes
Edited by Iblis, :

This message is a reply to:
 Message 17 by slevesque, posted 12-21-2009 6:27 PM slevesque has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 20 by slevesque, posted 12-22-2009 4:36 PM Iblis has not replied

  
Iblis
Member (Idle past 4145 days)
Posts: 663
Joined: 11-17-2005


Message 40 of 427 (540311)
12-23-2009 3:26 PM
Reply to: Message 37 by Briterican
12-23-2009 1:03 PM


Re: Nonsense begets nonsense
The scriptures themselves are nonsensical. This becomes self-evident when enlightened individuals try to understand them rationally. Any "conclusions" you might come to about them are an enormous waste of energy and do nothing for the species as a whole.
The Bible is a wonderful book if you take it for what it is, a cumulative anthology of human experience with idolatry. Read in this straightforward way, it shows the evolution of our religious thought, from simple polytheistic patronage
Exodus 15:11 writes:
Who [is] like unto thee, O LORD, among the gods? who [is] like thee, glorious in holiness, fearful [in] praises, doing wonders?
and monolatry
Deuteronomy 5:7 writes:
Thou shalt have none other gods before me.
through true monotheism
Psalm 96:5 writes:
For all the gods of the nations [are] idols: but the LORD made the heavens.
and the abandonment of material worship altogether
Isaiah 1:11 writes:
To what purpose [is] the multitude of your sacrifices unto me? saith the LORD: I am full of the burnt offerings of rams, and the fat of fed beasts; and I delight not in the blood of bullocks, or of lambs, or of he goats.
to an understanding of the real source of divinity
John 10:30 writes:
I and [my] Father are one.
and true responsibility for our creation and salvation.
John 10:34 writes:
Jesus answered them, Is it not written in your law, I said, Ye are gods?
The point where the nonsense starts is when you try to use it as an authority on history, biology, physics, government, and every other thing in the word except what it is. This mistake is due to an inability to understand and distinguish between various kinds of literature in conjunction with a profound resentment for reality and a defective relationship with real authority.
The person you are trying to respond to is arguing that this plain understanding of the written word is inaccurate, false, an illusion. He is specifically taking the position, regarding prophecy, that it does not say what it appears to say, that it has a secret meaning, which only he and those who are "in the know" can understand, and that it is this hidden understanding that is the real truth about what the seers foretold.
Unfortunately for him
Second Peter 1:20 writes:
Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.
He is seriously going to argue that this verse actually supports his point. This is because, as he has demonstrated repeatedly in his statements about the Law, he is not forbidden to lie. He is not even forbidden to lie about being forbidden to lie. His interpretation is more important to him, than what is being interpreted.
This is why you will find a good solid half of his time at this site is spent arguing with other believers and telling church elders that they don't know much about theology. He's a millstone roped around the neck of any sort of real faith.
I dreamed I called Jesus Christ on the phone and asked him, say, Man, did you really forgive them for they knew not what they did?
"Verily, verily, I say unto you," he replied, "I made my position on authority-and-submission as clear as I could: 'You know that the princes of the Gentiles exercise dominion over them, and they that are great exercise authority upon them. But it shall not be so among you.' Matt. 20:25. 'Every kingdom divided against itself is brought to desolation.' Matt. 12:25. 'If the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch.' Matt.15:14. 'For they bind heavy burdens and grievous to be borne, and lay them upon men's shoulders; but they themselves will not move them with one of their fingers.' Matt. 23:4. They be blind leaders of the blind, baby, and mechanical laws of punishment-and-conditioning lead them in little grooves of robot-life."
But, but I protested is there anything outside conditioned behavior? Is there a real freedom, Man? Is there?
"Find the place where Sade and I agree," he said, "and there you will find the beginning of a definition of liberty."
And the line went dead with a sudden click like the sound of a bedroom door closing as a little boy is pushed outside.
-- Robert Anton Wilson

This message is a reply to:
 Message 37 by Briterican, posted 12-23-2009 1:03 PM Briterican has not replied

  
Iblis
Member (Idle past 4145 days)
Posts: 663
Joined: 11-17-2005


(1)
Message 42 of 427 (540317)
12-23-2009 6:17 PM
Reply to: Message 41 by Brian
12-23-2009 4:57 PM


Re: propaganda
Oh, are we back on fictionality now? Good, good. Here, have some Josephus:
a miraculous birth
Antiquities 17:2.4 writes:
For there was a certain sect of men that were Jews, who valued themselves highly upon the exact skill they had in the law of their fathers, and made men believe they were highly favored by God, by whom this set of women were inveigled. These are those that are called the sect of the Pharisees, who were in a capacity of greatly opposing kings. A cunning sect they were, and soon elevated to a pitch of open fighting and doing mischief. Accordingly, when all the people of the Jews gave assurance of their good-will to Caesar, and to the king's government, these very men did not swear, being above six thousand; and when the king imposed a fine upon them, Pheroras's wife paid their fine for them. In order to requite which kindness of hers, since they were believed to have the foreknowledge of things to come by Divine inspiration, they foretold how God had decreed that Herod's government should cease, and his posterity should be deprived of it; but that the kingdom should come to her and Pheroras, and to their children. These predictions were not concealed from Salome, but were told the king; as also how they had perverted some persons about the palace itself; so the king slew such of the Pharisees as were principally accused, and Bagoas the eunuch, and one Carus, who exceeded all men of that time in comeliness, and one that was his catamite. He slew also all those of his own family who had consented to what the Pharisees foretold; and for Bagoas, he had been puffed up by them, as though he should be named the father and the benefactor of him who, by the prediction, was foretold to be their appointed king; for that this king would have all things in his power, and would enable Bagoas to marry, and to have children of his own body begotten.
the child prodigy
Life of Josephus 2 writes:
I was myself brought up with my brother, whose name was Matthias, for he was my own brother, by both father and mother; and I made mighty proficiency in the improvements of my learning, and appeared to have both a great memory and understanding. Moreover, when I was a child, and about fourteen years of age, I was commended by all for the love I had to learning; on which account the high priests and principal men of the city came then frequently to me together, in order to know my opinion about the accurate understanding of points of the law. And when I was about sixteen years old, I had a mind to make trim of the several sects that were among us.
Jesus and his disciples
Life of Josephus 12 writes:
So Jesus the son of Sapphias, one of those whom we have already mentioned as the leader of a seditious tumult of mariners and poor people, prevented us, and took with him certain Galileans, and set the entire palace on fire, and thought he should get a great deal of money thereby, because he saw some of the roofs gilt with gold. They also plundered a great deal of the furniture, which was done without our approbation; for after we had discoursed with Capellus and the principal men of the city, we departed from Bethmaus, and went into the Upper Galilee. But Jesus and his party slew all the Greeks that were inhabitants of Tiberias, and as many others as were their enemies before the war began.
sending forth the 70
Life of Josephus 14 writes:
And when I had sent for the most hardy among the robbers, I saw that it was not in my power to take their arms from them; but I persuaded the multitude to allow them money as pay, and told them it was better for them to give them a little willingly, rather than to [be forced to] overlook them when they plundered their goods from them. And when I had obliged them to take an oath not to come into that country, unless they were invited to come, or else when they had not their pay given them, I dismissed them, and charged them neither to make an expedition against the Romans, nor against those their neighbors that lay round about them; for my first care was to keep Galilee in peace. So I was willing to have the principal of the Galileans, in all seventy, as hostages for their fidelity, but still under the notion of friendship. Accordingly, I made them my friends and companions as I journeyed, and set them to judge causes; and with their approbation it was that I gave my sentences, while I endeavored not to mistake what justice required, and to keep my hands clear of all bribery in those determinations.
the little Apocalypse
Wars of the Jews 6:5.3 writes:
But, what is still more terrible, there was one Jesus, the son of Ananus, a plebeian and a husbandman, who, four years before the war began, and at a time when the city was in very great peace and prosperity, came to that feast whereon it is our custom for every one to make tabernacles to God in the temple, (23) began on a sudden to cry aloud, "A voice from the east, a voice from the west, a voice from the four winds, a voice against Jerusalem and the holy house, a voice against the bridegrooms and the brides, and a voice against this whole people!" This was his cry, as he went about by day and by night, in all the lanes of the city. However, certain of the most eminent among the populace had great indignation at this dire cry of his, and took up the man, and gave him a great number of severe stripes; yet did not he either say any thing for himself, or any thing peculiar to those that chastised him, but still went on with the same words which he cried before. Hereupon our rulers, supposing, as the case proved to be, that this was a sort of divine fury in the man, brought him to the Roman procurator, where he was whipped till his bones were laid bare; yet he did not make any supplication for himself, nor shed any tears, but turning his voice to the most lamentable tone possible, at every stroke of the whip his answer was, "Woe, woe to Jerusalem!" And when Albinus (for he was then our procurator) asked him, Who he was? and whence he came? and why he uttered such words? he made no manner of reply to what he said, but still did not leave off his melancholy ditty, till Albinus took him to be a madman, and dismissed him. Now, during all the time that passed before the war began, this man did not go near any of the citizens, nor was seen by them while he said so; but he every day uttered these lamentable words, as if it were his premeditated vow, "Woe, woe to Jerusalem!" Nor did he give ill words to any of those that beat him every day, nor good words to those that gave him food; but this was his reply to all men, and indeed no other than a melancholy presage of what was to come. This cry of his was the loudest at the festivals; and he continued this ditty for seven years and five months, without growing hoarse, or being tired therewith, until the very time that he saw his presage in earnest fulfilled in our siege, when it ceased; for as he was going round upon the wall, he cried out with his utmost force, "Woe, woe to the city again, and to the people, and to the holy house!" And just as he added at the last, "Woe, woe to myself also!" there came a stone out of one of the engines, and smote him, and killed him immediately; and as he was uttering the very same presages he gave up the ghost.
Jesus betrayed and abandoned by his disciples
Life of Josephus 22 writes:
I took with me many Galileans that were armed, as also some of those of Tiberias; and, when I had given orders that all the roads should be carefully guarded, I charged the keepers of the gates to give admittance to none but Jesus, when he came, with the principal of his men, and to exclude the rest; and in case they aimed to force themselves in, to use stripes [in order to repel them]. Accordingly, those that had received such a charge did as they were bidden, and Jesus came in with a few others; and when I had ordered him to throw down his arms immediately, and told him, that if he refused so to do, he was a dead man, he seeing armed men standing all round about him, was terrified, and complied; and as for those of his followers that were excluded, when they were informed that he was seized, they ran away. I then called Jesus to me by himself, and told him, that "I was not a stranger to that treacherous design he had against me, nor was I ignorant by whom he was sent for; that, however, I would forgive him what he had done already, if he would repent of it, and be faithful to me hereafter." And thus, upon his promise to do all that I desired, I let him go, and gave him leave to get those whom he had formerly had with him together again.
crucifixion and resurrection
Life of Josephus 75 writes:
And when I was sent by Titus Caesar with Cerealins, and a thousand horsemen, to a certain village called Thecoa, in order to know whether it were a place fit for a camp, as I came back, I saw many captives crucified, and remembered three of them as my former acquaintance. I was very sorry at this in my mind, and went with tears in my eyes to Titus, and told him of them; so he immediately commanded them to be taken down, and to have the greatest care taken of them, in order to their recovery; yet two of them died under the physician's hands, while the third recovered.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 41 by Brian, posted 12-23-2009 4:57 PM Brian has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 43 by Brian, posted 12-24-2009 4:43 AM Iblis has not replied

  
Iblis
Member (Idle past 4145 days)
Posts: 663
Joined: 11-17-2005


Message 53 of 427 (540392)
12-24-2009 4:01 PM
Reply to: Message 51 by Brian
12-24-2009 2:47 PM


Re: propaganda
How likely is it that the Barabbas episode was an actual historical event?
The whole story dissolves when you look at it with a tiny amount of common sense and even the slightest understanding of Aramaic.
When there is an event of political/social significance, we normally see protestors don't we? And they are never just on one side. One group is shouting "Free Willie! Save the Whales!" while the other group shouts "Native rights! Blubber is our culture!" Go down to an abortion clinic or a pseudo-town-hall-meeting and see for yourself.
Now, when we look at the name Barabbas we find that bar Abba means "son of the Father". Obviously, in Mark's source (traditionally the sermons of Peter) one side demands that myth-boy be released to them, while the other side wants him crucified. The evangelist is writing for a Gentile audience though, under imperial rule, so he needs to take every step he can to absolve the legitimate government from accusations.
In order to do this, he has to make the audience unanimous, show them as somehow pressuring the procurator into doing what they want. This is totally out of character for Pilate, but that can be blurred by exploiting the fact that he is known to do things on a whim. The trick is to make Jesus and "the son of the Father" into two different people, and suggest that Pilate will only release one of them.
This becomes even clearer when we look at some of the earliest variants, such as the Matthew version in the Aramaic in the Peshitta and the Caesarean text-types in Greek
NETBIBLE Matthew 27:16 writes:
At that time they had in custody a notorious prisoner named Jesus Barabbas.
What are the odds of Pilate having two separate prisoners, one known as Jesus son of God and the other called Jesus son of the Father; at the one time in history and legend where he is reported to have done what the Jews wanted without at least killing a thousand or so to make them know who's boss first; and killing the guy he liked and respected because they wanted him to release the robber/seditonist?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 51 by Brian, posted 12-24-2009 2:47 PM Brian has not replied

  
Iblis
Member (Idle past 4145 days)
Posts: 663
Joined: 11-17-2005


Message 59 of 427 (540421)
12-24-2009 11:02 PM
Reply to: Message 48 by Brian
12-24-2009 2:05 PM


Re: The real Suffering Servant
We have a claim, again unsupported, that there’s some ‘double-fulfillment’ of prophecy jive going on.
Oh, it's much worse than that. One of the scriptures being used as toilet-paper in this argument is Genesis 3:15. The claim is being advanced that it would have made no sense at all to the original audience, and therefore must be construed as somehow referring to Jesus. This is plain nonsense, any mature adult with the slightest understanding of Hebrew figurative language knows exactly what is being described in this passage.
It isn't even so much allegory as light euphemism. The archetypal Man and Woman have just had their first experience with the sexual act, the "forbidden fruit" which is the source of adult rights and responsibilities (the knowledge of good and evil.) The first consequence is immediate physical soreness. The "serpent" (male sexual organ), which had stood surprisingly upright, now droops down and its head is bruised from the breaking of the hymen, which also results in the female sexual organ ("heel") being wounded, ie shedding blood.
This is confirmed by the consequences which follow. The Woman will bear a child, which is a painful and unpleasant process. Bringing children into the world and the responsibility that entails affects not only the mother but also the Man, who must work hard for the rest of his life to care for his offspring.
Genesis 3:15 is not referenced as referring to the Messiah at any point in the New Testament. This even though Matthew and Hebrews go to any lengths available to twist every Old Testament prophecy they can around to serve this purpose. It simply won't work even for them, as it would be like trying to claim that the phrase "the birds and the bees" is a prophecy of the future establishment of Israel as a modern state in 1948. And the New Testament audience isn't that naive....

This message is a reply to:
 Message 48 by Brian, posted 12-24-2009 2:05 PM Brian has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 61 by Dawn Bertot, posted 12-25-2009 12:29 AM Iblis has replied

  
Iblis
Member (Idle past 4145 days)
Posts: 663
Joined: 11-17-2005


Message 69 of 427 (540516)
12-25-2009 9:05 PM
Reply to: Message 61 by Dawn Bertot
12-25-2009 12:29 AM


"hidden" in plain sight
Ill go ahead and trust inspiration verses this insightful interpretation by a clear skeptic.
Whose inspiration, Origen's? While I certainly think the man was inspired in places, I am talking about a quality of poetry and creative writing; whereas you are referring to a perverse doctrine that characterizes God as taking the prophets and the apostles and sticking his hand up their ass and using them as sock-puppets.
In any case, Origen is following Philo's lead in interpreting the Hebrew scriptures as allegorical in every case, only shifting the target to be shored up from Alexandrian gnostic Judaism to his own commentaries on the New Testament. These commentaries are the source of numerous attempted deletions to the Gospels and Epistles. I don't think you approve of these cuts and chops, certainly not all of them; so why would you approve of the doctrines created to support them?
Answer: you have no idea what I'm talking about, do you?
Why should I accept this as the interpretation, since it is no where explicated in any other passages in scripture?
Nonsense! Here
Proverbs 30:19 writes:
The way of an eagle in the air; the way of a serpent upon a rock; the way of a ship in the midst of the sea; and the way of a man with a maid.
and here
Song of Solomon 4:16 writes:
Awake, O north wind; and come, thou south; blow upon my garden, [that] the spices thereof may flow out. Let my beloved come into his garden, and eat his pleasant fruits.
and here
Song of Solomon 5:7 writes:
The watchmen that went about the city found me, they smote me, they wounded me; the keepers of the walls took away my veil from me.
and here.
Isaiah 14:29 writes:
Rejoice not thou, whole Palestina, because the rod of him that smote thee is broken: for out of the serpent's root shall come forth a cockatrice, and his fruit [shall be] a fiery flying serpent.
Had enough? Let's move on then.
if the story is only a poetic expression, WHAT IS THE PROBLEM with it being a reference to the future Messiah and his actions.
Why shouldn't I understand "love they neighbor as thyself" as meaning to always spank the little children before and after raping them? Why couldn't we interpret the torture and persecution of Jews and pagans by the medieval Catholic church as being "spiritual" tolerance? Why wouldn't you accept the revelation that everything is clean in Acts 10:9-16 as indicating that sodomy and bestiality are now okay?
Answer: Words have meaning. They can't be muddled up and interchanged at will the way your pseudo-theology treats them. "Church" (called out) is not the same as "kingdom" (marked in). "Redemption" (buying back) is not the same as "salvation" (preserving from loss). "Son of man" (mortal) is not the same as "son of God" (angel). And "seed" (ejaculate) is not the same as "Jesus" (savior).
Since most if not all of the Old Testament writers and characters considered the story in Gen as literal, your statement is not valid. The refernce to the serpent in the garden in other passages in scripture would invalidate your conclusion about it not NECESSARILY refering to Christ. If satan was real and he was in the form of a serpent, then the passage may very well and most likely does refer to Christ
The story of Eve and the Garden is not even mentioned anywhere else in the Hebrew scriptures, much less asserted to be literal. The only place even Adam is ever referred to again is in a genealogy of David at First Chronicles 1:1, written up by the same team that compiled the late Babylonian commentary in Genesis 1:1-2:3 on the Creation Hymn (represented in its original form in Psalms 103 & 148 and referenced in numerous other places) in together with the deliciously-dirty series of shaggy dog stories that begin at Genesis 2:3 and continue on and off every few chapters through the Law and the Former Prophets (Deuteronomic History.)
The fact that you profess those scriptures to be holy, while at the same time getting totally grossed out by any attempt to translate the puns which are their purpose in such a way as to make their meaning understood, is a naked, throbbing sign of the bizarre conditioning you have been put through to make you a good slave.
As for the angel you are slandering, he is only portrayed in one book of the Old Testament, the framing story of Job. There, he is depicted as obeying the commands of his God and doing the job for which he was created. In most occurrences of the word in the Hebrew scriptures, as in Numbers 22:22, the "adversary" being referred to represents Yahweh himself (he is who he is.) And you will have to admit that the New Testament verses that haven't been totally subverted in your mind by your masters paint much the same picture.
Matthew 5:25 writes:
Agree with thine adversary quickly, whiles thou art in the way with him; lest at any time the adversary deliver thee to the judge, and the judge deliver thee to the officer, and thou be cast into prison.
Let me just ask you this: if "serpent" means that angel you mistakenly think you are not required to forgive, then what is this verse about?
And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up:
Answer: he's leveraging the qabalistic teaching that "serpent" (nachash) and messiah ("annointed") represent the same total in Hebrew arithmetic, 358, and are therefore considered in some sense to be equivalent. This is part of the not-very-secret doctrine that God is playing both ends against the middle in a cosmic game of Tarocci solitaire:
Isaiah 45:7 writes:
I form the light, and create darkness: I make peace, and create evil: I the LORD do all these [things].
The authors of the gospels and epistles do this sort of thing all the time. The New Testament has almost as many instances of gematria as the Old does off-color puns. Why do you not know about any of this stuff?
Answer: the people whose teachings you are entrusting the fate of your immortal soul to have no understanding whatsoever of the culture they claim to be "experts" on! They are just links in a long chain of charismatic liars, who know nothing except how to manipulate ideas in a manner suited to cause you to have uncontrollable feelings that you mistake for true spiritual experiences, and thereby recruit you into carrying on the process into the next generation.
Matthew 15:14 writes:
Let them alone: they be blind leaders of the blind. And if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch.
And if there is some curiosity in your mind, as to what the word "ditch" might mean here, in some prophetic sense, have a clue
Proverbs 23:27 writes:
For a whore [is] a deep ditch; and a strange woman [is] a narrow pit.
You have a picture of God that portrays him as wanting things, and not getting them. If such a picture were even remotely true, he really would be a failure!
Father, forgive them; they know not what they do.
-- JMFC
Edited by Iblis, : "humor" withdrawn

This message is a reply to:
 Message 61 by Dawn Bertot, posted 12-25-2009 12:29 AM Dawn Bertot has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 72 by Dawn Bertot, posted 12-26-2009 11:37 AM Iblis has not replied

  
Iblis
Member (Idle past 4145 days)
Posts: 663
Joined: 11-17-2005


Message 74 of 427 (540574)
12-26-2009 1:17 PM
Reply to: Message 73 by Barabbas126
12-26-2009 12:26 PM


Re: "Jesus"/Failure
Very good! I rather thought I might meet One in this thread.
Now, perhaps more for the sake of our audience than yourself, I must warn you not to re-imprint. A model is only as good as the situation it is used to master. Certainly when you find gods, choose those that make you burn inside. But never let them weight you down, always rise to them. Barabbas and Paul are no more "real" than Christ and Pilate, nor you nor I. The only thing real in this question is, as you have signed, that in me to that in you.
Having said that, I am interested in your views of the first century. You seem to be familiar with the son of Sapphias and perhaps the son of Ananus as well, but do you know much about bar Gamaliel? His father was one of the foremost students of Hillel and allegedly Paul's teacher as well. If anyone taught the oral law to the masses in dramatizations in the way portrayed in the Gospels, it was him; he is the youngest person recorded to have made rabboni (judge not requiring consensus, full member) in the Great Sanhedrin before its dissolution, this would have taken place in the time of Pilate.
He went on to become high priest in 63 AD. He is believed to have been the "Jesus" (Yehoshua) recorded to have led the party of venerable sages who joined Eleazar at Masada at the final hour in 73 AD to receive communion with him.
John 11:14-16 writes:
Then said Jesus unto them plainly, Lazarus is dead.
And I am glad for your sakes that I was not there, to the intent ye may believe; nevertheless let us go unto him.
Then said Thomas, which is called Didymus, unto his fellowdisciples, Let us also go, that we may die with him.
Does this mean we should drink the kool-aid? Far from it, we have things to do. But in due time (I assume you are vowed) then certainly, we "must be born again."
Peace!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 73 by Barabbas126, posted 12-26-2009 12:26 PM Barabbas126 has not replied

  
Iblis
Member (Idle past 4145 days)
Posts: 663
Joined: 11-17-2005


Message 77 of 427 (540646)
12-27-2009 4:07 AM
Reply to: Message 30 by Brian
12-23-2009 6:11 AM


What's up with Matthew
We also have to consider the reliability of the Gospel of Matthew given the whole range of errors that the author of Matthew makes regarding the OT prophecies, he pulls so many out of context and invents quite a few of his own that we really need to question how useful this book is for reconstructing the past.
As you know, I don't believe these are "errors" in Matthew at all. My position is that he knew exactly what he was doing. In order to understand this, it's necessary to understand not only his sources but also his setting. He has Sayings material in common with Luke, not only that which they tend to agree on almost word for word (Q) but also that which Luke uses totally differently (M); and all three synoptics have Narrative content in common which constitutes nearly the entirety of Mark (K). But he is doing his own job, in a way that sometimes differs wildly from the way the other Evangelists handle their text.
Matthew is working, probably in Antioch, against sets of rival teachers commonly grouped as "Judaizers" like the Brethren, Ebionites, and Mandeans. These are the folks who want to make the emerging Gentile Christianity into a sect of Judaism, urging them to conform to the written and oral Law and observe practices like circumcision and kosher diet and so forth. This conflict forms much of the plot of the Acts of the Apostles and orthodox position papers reflecting the allowable extremes of the argument are found throughout the New Testament, particularly in Romans, James and Hebrews.
The fact that the teachings of these proto-heretics are a distortion of real Judaism is not a problem for Matthew. He is perfectly willing to fight them with their own weapons! Seen in this light, it becomes obvious that Matthew is systematically working to prove that Jesus is not the Messiah expected by these Judaizers.
Let's examine a couple of famous tongue-in-cheek constructions from toward the beginning of the Gospel, to see how this works:
Matthew 1:22-25
The Messiah proclaimed by the Judaizers should be named "Immanuel";
Jesus is named "Jesus".
Matthew 2:23
The alleged Messiah would be a Nazarite, a member of a Jewish order ordained in the Law to maintain strict ritual cleanliness, not cut their hair, never drink wine, and refrain from approaching dead bodies;
Jesus is a Nazarene, inhabitant of an area that throughout the first century functioned as a mausoleum, unclean for any legalistic Jew and profoundly unclean for the snotty, longhaired, make-up-a-new-oral-law-every-day Judaizers.
See the idea? These sort of reconstructions aren't unfamiliar to the Hebrew scholar, they in fact bear a strong resemblance to a lot of the (mostly) minority opinions found in the Mishna and Gemara.
Here's a nice parody of this line of thought from the Babylonian Talmud which is particularly suited for this thread:
Sanhedrin 43a writes:
Our Rabbis taught: Yeshu had five disciples, Matthai, Nakai, Nezer, Buni and Todah. When Matthai was brought [before the court] he said to them [the judges], Shall Matthai be executed? Is it not written, Matthai [when] shall I come and appear before God?37 Thereupon they retorted; Yes, Matthai shall be executed, since it is written, When Matthai [when] shall [he] die and his name perish.38 When Nakai was brought in he said to them; Shall Nakai be executed? It is not written, Naki [the innocent] and the righteous slay thou not?39 Yes, was the answer, Nakai shall be executed, since it is written, in secret places does Naki40 [the innocent] slay.41 When Nezer was brought in, he said; Shall Nezer be executed? Is it not written, And Nezer [a twig] shall grow forth out of his roots.42 Yes, they said, Nezer shall be executed, since it is written, But thou art cast forth away from thy grave like Nezer [an abhorred offshoot].43 When Buni was brought in, he said: Shall Buni be executed? Is it not written, Beni [my son], my first born?44 Yes, they said, Buni shall be executed, since it is written, Behold I will slay Bine-ka [thy son] thy first born.45 And when Todah was brought in, he said to them; Shall Todah be executed? Is it not written, A psalm for Todah [thanksgiving]?46 Yes, they answered, Todah shall be executed, since it is written, Whoso offereth the sacrifice of Todah [thanksgiving] honoured me.47
http://www.come-and-hear.com/sanhedrin/sanhedrin_43.html
Note in this passage that Matthew, the only recognizable disciple, is also the one whose alternative interpretations are closest in meaning. This reflects the fact that while he departs from the literal interpretation, he does so much less than his rivals on either side, as seen also in the texts from Qumran in one direction and those of Nag Hammadi in the other.
Hebrews and the other position statements also tend to operate in this same current of thought, although in a much more relaxed and positive way. Any attempt to understand prophecy in the New Testament without a proper grasp of this situation can only lead over the same cliff the Judaizers fell off of.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 30 by Brian, posted 12-23-2009 6:11 AM Brian has not replied

  
Iblis
Member (Idle past 4145 days)
Posts: 663
Joined: 11-17-2005


Message 80 of 427 (540685)
12-27-2009 3:41 PM
Reply to: Message 78 by PaulK
12-27-2009 5:43 AM


What's up with Peter
You specifically insisted that the gospel writers supported your "dual" reading. When I disagreed you THEN offered only 1 Peter - and misrepresented my position, too.
I predicted this whole performance already in Message 40. Talk about prophecy!
Peter specifically says, contrary to the position being argued by his alleged followers, that no prophecy has any sort of hidden later double meaning unknown to the prophet. To understand what he means by this, let's look at his context
Second Peter 1:16-20 writes:
For we have not followed cunningly devised fables, when we made known unto you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but were eyewitnesses of his majesty.
For he received from God the Father honour and glory, when there came such a voice to him from the excellent glory, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.
And this voice which came from heaven we heard, when we were with him in the holy mount.
We have also a more sure word of prophecy; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day star arise in your hearts:
Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.
Notice that the main example of prophecy that Peter is talking about in this passage isn't some pun from Isaiah, it's a vision he personally had himself. His argument is that, just like the OT prophets, he is in charge of his own material! Other people are twisting things around and making bizarre claims, that he is the Rockof Ages for example. Look how he deals with these mockers here
First Peter 2:6-8 writes:
Wherefore also it is contained in the scripture, Behold, I lay in Sion a chief corner stone, elect, precious: and he that believeth on him shall not be confounded.
Unto you therefore which believe [he is] precious: but unto them which be disobedient, the stone which the builders disallowed, the same is made the head of the corner,
And a stone of stumbling, and a rock of offence, [even to them] which stumble at the word, being disobedient: whereunto also they were appointed.
and here
Second Peter 2:17-22 writes:
These are wells without water, clouds that are carried with a tempest; to whom the mist of darkness is reserved for ever.
For when they speak great swelling [words] of vanity, they allure through the lusts of the flesh, [through much] wantonness, those that were clean escaped from them who live in error.
While they promise them liberty, they themselves are the servants of corruption: for of whom a man is overcome, of the same is he brought in bondage.
For if after they have escaped the pollutions of the world through the knowledge of the Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, they are again entangled therein, and overcome, the latter end is worse with them than the beginning.
For it had been better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than, after they have known [it], to turn from the holy commandment delivered unto them.
But it is happened unto them according to the true proverb, The dog [is] turned to his own vomit again; and the sow that was washed to her wallowing in the mire.
and especially here.
Second Peter 3:14-16 writes:
Wherefore, beloved, seeing that ye look for such things, be diligent that ye may be found of him in peace, without spot, and blameless.
And account [that] the longsuffering of our Lord [is] salvation; even as our beloved brother Paul also according to the wisdom given unto him hath written unto you;
As also in all [his] epistles, speaking in them of these things; in which are some things hard to be understood, which they that are unlearned and unstable wrest, as [they do] also the other scriptures, unto their own destruction.
The reason that Peter is using Old Testament prophecy in his epistles is because that is what his opponents are doing, and they are twisting them around to mean whatever they want them to mean. If this is to be allowed, well then, he can do a better job of it, being much more learned, and a prophet in his own right besides! But the people he is against, the ones perverting the word, are the same people Paul is talking about when he complains about the "endless genealogies" that Matthew is parodying in his own sally against these same sleazy Torah-thumpers.
Words have meaning. They aren't interchangeable. They mean what they say they mean, not some other thing someone afterward built a complicated, unstable Jenga blind-faith religion on.
Matthew 7:26-27 writes:
And every one that heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them not, shall be likened unto a foolish man, which built his house upon the sand:
And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it fell: and great was the fall of it.
Edited by Iblis, : The ambition of Caesar and of Napoleon pales before that which could not rest until it had seized the minds of men and controlled even their unborn thoughts
Edited by Iblis, :

This message is a reply to:
 Message 78 by PaulK, posted 12-27-2009 5:43 AM PaulK has not replied

  
Iblis
Member (Idle past 4145 days)
Posts: 663
Joined: 11-17-2005


Message 88 of 427 (540757)
12-28-2009 4:25 PM
Reply to: Message 82 by purpledawn
12-28-2009 6:34 AM


Re: Bible Satire
Dual prophecy was born from satire.
Always a fun read!
Here's an early Jewish document which is indisputably a satire on the Messianic cults, and which strongly resembles Matthew in its use of prophecy.
http://www.essene.com/History&Essenes/toled.htm
For example
The Toledoth writes:
When Yeshu was summoned before the queen, this time there were present also the Sages and Judah Iskarioto. Yeshu said: "It is spoken of me, 'I will ascend into heaven.'" He lifted his arms like the wings of an eagle and he flew between heaven and earth, to the amazement of everyone.
The elders asked Iskarioto to do likewise. He did, and flew toward heaven. Iskarioto attempted to force Yeshu down to earth but neither one of the two could prevail against the other for both had the use of the Ineffable Name. However, Iskarioto defiled Yeshu, so that they both lost their power and fell down to the earth, and in their condition of defilement the letters of the Ineffable Name escaped from them. Because of this deed of Judah they weep on the eve of the birth of Yeshu.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 82 by purpledawn, posted 12-28-2009 6:34 AM purpledawn has not replied

  
Iblis
Member (Idle past 4145 days)
Posts: 663
Joined: 11-17-2005


Message 97 of 427 (540999)
12-30-2009 2:24 PM
Reply to: Message 96 by Brian
12-30-2009 2:05 PM


Re: Getting nowhere
Are we done then? At least with this round?
Let's count up the current score on both sides
First place
Brian, arguing Jesus is a failure: excellent documentation, compelling construction;
Buzsaw, arguing he just isn't done yet: also very good documentation, appeal to scientific method
Second place
PaulK, arguing that he is "largely obscured" by euhemeristic myth: extremely good documentation, persistence in the face of adversity;
slevesque, arguing he is misunderstood: not so great with the texts, but introduces some interesting resources
Third place
Jazzns, arguing that he is confusing: also low on text, but good comments and questions;
Son Goku, switching sides to argue that he is one Being but three Persons, so the two genealogies aren't a problem
Honorable mentions
purpledawn, arguing that he is satirized;
hooah212002, switching sides to argue that he isn't so much a failure as a bastard
Darwin awards
Barabbas126, for introducing a totally unsupported conspiracy theory, which is nevertheless charming enough to make me break character;
the top poster, for flooding, begging the question, appealing to authority, arguing ad hominem, and "willfully choosing to believe a lie." (Damn I miss Ray.)
Edited by Iblis, : ten dollar word added
Edited by Iblis, : added qualifiers and a suffix

This message is a reply to:
 Message 96 by Brian, posted 12-30-2009 2:05 PM Brian has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 98 by hooah212002, posted 12-30-2009 2:30 PM Iblis has not replied
 Message 99 by PaulK, posted 12-30-2009 2:35 PM Iblis has replied
 Message 103 by purpledawn, posted 12-31-2009 7:11 AM Iblis has not replied
 Message 104 by Son Goku, posted 01-01-2010 1:35 PM Iblis has not replied

  
Iblis
Member (Idle past 4145 days)
Posts: 663
Joined: 11-17-2005


Message 100 of 427 (541003)
12-30-2009 2:41 PM
Reply to: Message 99 by PaulK
12-30-2009 2:35 PM


Re: Getting nowhere
You've got my position wrong.
Corrected.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 99 by PaulK, posted 12-30-2009 2:35 PM PaulK has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 101 by PaulK, posted 12-30-2009 3:09 PM Iblis has not replied

  
Iblis
Member (Idle past 4145 days)
Posts: 663
Joined: 11-17-2005


Message 114 of 427 (541366)
01-02-2010 8:09 PM
Reply to: Message 57 by Buzsaw
12-24-2009 8:58 PM


Re: The real Suffering Servant
Hi Buzsaw!
We read that in the end time it will happen. We see it happening on the world scene. This is super phenomenal to have this little nation scattered globally for nearly 20 centuries to return intact as a fully operative nation winning their wars against at least 20 to one odds. Wise and astute scholars deduce from all of this that what has been prophesied such as some of what you cited will indeed likely come to pass, just as the rest has been on track as prophesied.
I think you have the most viable argument against the "failure" hypothesis. I have some questions though. Do you think that when he gets back, and fulfills the "Conquering King" and "Mighty Messenger" groups of prophecies, the Jews will then recognize him as their messiah? Other people might stick on the point that claiming to be God is a no-no for Judaism no matter how many prophecies one fulfills, but I don't believe you have to deal with that particular setback.
Then also -- this is the rough part -- how about the Moslems? They also say that they expect him back for the End Times, to defeat the false messiah and reunite all the Abrahamic religions.
Jesus will descend at the point of a white arcade, east of Damascus, dressed in yellow robes - his head anointed. He will then join the Mahdi in his war against the Dajjal. Jesus, considered in Islam as a Muslim, will abide by the Islamic teachings. Eventually, Jesus will slay the Dajjal, and then everyone from the people of the book (ahl al-kitāb, referring to Jews and Christians) will believe in him.
Jesus in Islam - Wikipedia
Is he going to be able to do it? Or are they a lost cause?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 57 by Buzsaw, posted 12-24-2009 8:58 PM Buzsaw has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 120 by Buzsaw, posted 01-03-2010 12:23 AM Iblis has not replied
 Message 122 by Buzsaw, posted 01-03-2010 1:11 AM Iblis has not replied

  
Iblis
Member (Idle past 4145 days)
Posts: 663
Joined: 11-17-2005


Message 133 of 427 (541855)
01-06-2010 2:51 PM
Reply to: Message 129 by Brad H
01-06-2010 3:00 AM


From the authentic pen of lying scribes
Hi Brad, sorry it has to be me to break it to you, but you've been swindled. We have no first century copies of Josephus, Tacitus, or Pliny. (Nor the New Testament!) We derive our knowledge of all these texts from allusions to them made later, and copies preserved from even later than that by the Vatican.
Third century supergenius Origen spends thousands of words trying to defend the historicity of Jesus against the heretic Celsus, and would have killed for references like these. He has copies of all three collections, but does not find these passages in them. They aren't there in his time.
The first reference to the Josephus testimony is in the fourth century, by Eusebius. All the copies we have now are derived from his, and the passages have long been considered false on purely philological grounds. The Testimonium Flavium is a clear insert into a section about three persecutions of the Jews, instigated by Pilate; it is slammed in between the introduction of the third persecution, and the actual story of the massacre regarding the aqueduct which is that persecution. The James story is even more obvious, the Jesus mentioned in that passage pre-editing is clearly James's brother, Jesus son of Damneus, who is made high priest by the governor in the course of cleaning out the Ananus-Caiphas faction.
The first mention of the creed recital in Tacitus is by Sulpicius Severus, in the fifth century. Again, all modern copies are derived from his. The fraud is inserted into a sequence of accounts of Nero's good points, and purports to blame him for the burning of Rome and to create an unfounded myth of Christian martyrs which is entirely contrary to the historical fact of Roman religious freedom. Nero was in Anzio during the fire, and his response to it was to increase the head-tax on Jews, not your fictional first-century Christians.
The alleged letters between Pliny and Trajan are not part of the 9 books of correspondence prepared by Pliny himself, consisting of 247 such letters that he himself specifies by number. They are appended to his work during the Middle Ages as an undocumented 10th book, supposedly derived from the imperial library in Rome by the Catholic scholars there. Nor are they the least bit believable, in them Pliny claims to be unfamiliar with a point of law, though he had been a lawyer, held high political rank, and on close terms with the imperial government since the age of 17. They depict him as seeking advice about this minor matter from the emperor himself!
The only way we could put any credence in such a mass of contradictory and convenient "testimonies" is if we had reason to believe that Eusebius, Sulpicius and the medieval Vatican were somehow trustworthy sources. Eusebius is the author of the Letters of Antoninus Pius, a pseudoepigraphal fraud, and the 12th Book of Evangelical Preparation, the 32nd chapter of which is entitled "How it may be Lawful and Fitting to use Falsehood as a Medicine, and for the Benefit of those who Want to be Deceived." Sulpicius Severus is the author of the Life of St. Martin, which attributes more miracles to the Pelagian political speaker in question per chapter than the whole New Testament attributes to Jesus. The Vatican is where the Borgias are born, to their father Pope Alexander VI.
If you want to actually fight these fine points out, as usual, find another thread to do it in. Brian has conceded fictionality already, just to make his argument that even a historical Jesus who does everything the NT says he did, still can't be the messiah predicted by the Hebrew scriptures.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 129 by Brad H, posted 01-06-2010 3:00 AM Brad H has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024