DavidFirth
Well-Known Member
And apparently fundamentalist Christians can only understand things in simple terms.
By all means.....keep tying Christianity to this ant-science attitude.
Ad hominem retorts are the best you can do.
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
And apparently fundamentalist Christians can only understand things in simple terms.
By all means.....keep tying Christianity to this ant-science attitude.
It matters because God claims that He created the universe in six days so either He did or He lied.
What I know is that Jesus is a character in a mythical religious story that illuminates for mankind a new way of perceiving and conceptualizing "God", and mankind's relationship to that "God". What I believe is that there is likely some relevance to historical reality, and some gross exaggeration going on in the story. I believe there probably was an extraordinary man at the heart of this story, and at the source of it's message. The exact facts of his life's events are lost to history, but the revelation remains intact in the story, I think, even though it's been severely corrupted by the religion that has sprung from it.What do you believe about Jesus?
What I know is that Jesus is a character in a mythical religious story that illuminates for mankind a new way of perceiving and conceptualizing "God", and mankind's relationship to that "God". What I believe is that there is likely some relevance to historical reality, and some gross exaggeration going on in the story. I believe there probably was an extraordinary man at the heart of this story, and at the source of it's message. The exact facts of his life's events are lost to history, but the revelation remains intact in the story, I think, even though it's been severely corrupted by the religion that has sprung from it.
The revelation as I understand it is that "God" exists both without and within us, in spirit form, and is manifest in our lives through love, forgiveness, kindness, and generosity. And that if we humans will allow ourselves to be the expressions of this divine spirit within us, we will be healed and saved from our own innate, self-destructive, insanity ("sin"). I personally don't have any way of knowing if God exists or not, or what God's nature might be, but I do believe in the existence of this "divine spirit" that resides both within and without us, and that if we will allow ourselves to become manifesting expressions of this divine spirit, it will heal us and save us from ourselves. And save the world, through us, (as we are it's greatest threat).
Because I believe in the revelation and the promise of "Jesus the Christ". Why wouldn't I?Why do you call yourself a Christian?
Because I believe in the revelation and the promise of "Jesus the Christ". Why wouldn't I?
Also, you will note that I make a point not to call myself a religious Christian, because I don't accept the various religious doctrines associated with Christ by the Christian religion. I don't wish to be misunderstood, myself, nor cause anyone else to misunderstand religious Christianity by my comments or observations.
I have a question for you, more in keeping with the thread topic: Jesus was a Jew, speaking to other Jews when he admonished them to mind the proscriptions of their Torah. But Jews then, as Jews now, are not evangelical, and have never believed it necessary for a non-Jew to follow those proscriptions or to convert to Judaism. So even Jesus himself would not expect you or I, as non-Jews, to follow the proscriptions of an ancient Jewish text. And he certainly would not have considered that text to be the equivalent of the "words of God"!Why do you call yourself a Christian?
I have a question for you, more in keeping with the thread topic: Jesus was a Jew, speaking to other Jews when he admonished them to mind the proscriptions of their Torah. But Jews then, as Jews now, are not evangelical, and have never believed it necessary for a non-Jew to follow those proscriptions or to convert to Judaism. So even Jesus himself would not expect you or I, as non-Jews, to follow the proscriptions of an ancient Jewish text. And he certainly would not have considered that text to be the equivalent of the "words of God"!
So why on Earth do so many modern Christians think they are supposed to be following and adhering to some ancient Jewish religious text when they are neither living in an ancient society, nor are they even Jews?
"Christ" is a term that refers to a state of being. That is the state of being an exemplification of "God's divine spirit" that resides within us. I am agnostic about "God", but not about that divine spirit that resides within us.I'm just trying to understand what it is exactly that you do believe about Christ.
I assume you mean Jesus. And the answer is both yes and no. In the time that Jesus lived, to be the 'son of' a family patriarch was to be a physical and actual extension of that patriarch within the society. The word of the son was taken to be the word of the father/patriarch. Just as the words a student or follower of a religious teacher would write and preach were written in his teacher's name, as he, too, was considered an extension on his teacher's mind. So when this man Jesus called himself, or was referred to by his followers as "the son of God", what they were saying is that he was the physical representation of God's mind and spirit within his community, like the son of a family patriarch. And that he speaks and acts on behalf of his "father" (God). So Jesus never claimed to BE GOD, nor to be A GOD. But only to be a human representative of God's spirit, on Earth, and to his people. Thus, to be a "Christ" (anointed one).Is He the Son of God?
I don't know. It seems reasonable that he might be killed for his message, but I doubt that the Romans would have done the bidding of Jewish high priests in the way the story claims.Did He die on a cross for you?
That's very unlikely. It was a necessary part of the story, however, to symbolize the ultimate transcendence of that 'divine spirit within' even in the face of torture and death. As well as to keep the "story of the man/Christ", alive, indefinitely.Did He rise from the dead?
"Christ" is a term that refers to s state of being. That is the state of being an exemplification of "God's divine spirit" that resides within us. I am agnostic about "God", but not about that divine spirit that resides within us.
I assume you mean Jesus. And the answer is both yes and no. In the time that Jesus lived, to be the 'son of' a family patriarch was to be a physical and actual extension of that patriarch. The word of the son was taken to be the word of the father/patriarch. Just as the word of a student of follower of a religious teacher would write and preach in his teacher's name, as he, too, was considered an extension on his teacher's mind. SO when this man Jesus called himself, or was referred to by his followers as "the son of God", what they were saying is that he was the physical representation of God's mind and spirit in human form. Like the son of a family patriarch. And that he speaks and acts on behalf of his "father" (God). So Jesus never claimed to BE GOD, nor to BE A GOD. But only to be a human representative of God's spirit, on Earth, and to his people. Thus, to be a/the "Christ".
I do not know that Jesus of Nazareth actually even existed, though I believe that he probably did. And I don't know what he actually claimed, though I suspect he did make such claims, and that he did outrage the the religious 'powers that be' even though he had no intention of upsetting their authority. These parts of the story all seem quite reasonable and probable to me.
I don't know. It seems reasonable that he might be killed for his teaching, but I doubt that the Romans would have done the bidding of Jewish high priests in the way the story claims.
That's very unlikely. It was a necessary part of the story, however, to symbolize the ultimate transcendence of that 'divine spirit within' even in the face of torture and death. As well as to keep the "story of the man/Christ", alive, indefinately.
Of course man's. If you go by scripture, you notice it's man's testimony and man's experience. Without the bible, as a christian, how would you know god?
[God's word - writings in the Judeo-Christian Scriptures that were inspired by God....Man's word - claims and writings by man that were not inspired by God]
“Moreover, He said to me, “Son of man, take into your heart all My words which I will speak to you and listen closely. “Go to the exiles, to the sons of your people, and speak to them and tell them, whether they listen or not, ‘Thus says the Lord God.’ ”” (Ezekiel 3:10–11, NASB95)
That certainly sounds to me to be God speaking to Ezekiel and telling him to speak what he had been told, what does it sound like to you?
So what's possible is that the concept of a "day" can also be used in a figure of speech to indicate a period of time, whether in the singular or plural.
These comments are not referring to spreading Judaism, and they were not referring to obeying Judaic texts. Jesus "commanded" only one thing: that was to love God, themselves and each other, as one.
These comments are not referring to spreading Judaism, and they were not referring to obeying Judaic texts. Jesus "commanded" only one thing: that was to love God, themselves and each other, as one.
How about if the Genesis account of creation is literal as it reads or is it a metaphor of some kind and if so why?What's there to debate here?
I think you want to play "scripture wars" with me, and I won't play that with you. Just because someone wrote it doesn't mean Jesus ever said it. And even if Jesus said it, it doesn't mean we understand how he meant it. Nor does it mean he couldn't have been wrong. I don't get my truth from other people, or from what other people write in religious books.I think maybe you'd better read the verses again.
I think you want to play "scripture wars" with me, and I won't play that with you. Just because someone wrote it doesn't mean Jesus ever said. And even if Jesus said it, doesn't mean we understand how he meant it. Not does it mean he couldn't have been wrong. I don't get my truth from other people.
That would depend on what you are claiming is God's word and what evidence you provide to support such a notion.
1) This is intended for those who say they are Christians [one who professes belief in the teachings of Jesus Christ] but try to explain away the creation version in Genesis using “interpretation” and/or “translation” issues in order to reconcile with non-believers.
I feel l must congratulate you