Sleeppy
Fatalist. Christian. Pacifist.
Is it possible for a virgin to give birth?
Mutations cause many seemingly weird, or abnormal, things to become possible.. But scientists are also able to engineer many of these things as well.
-
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:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Mary is the most important figure in Christianity
- Thread starter Estro Felino
- Start date
Is it possible for a virgin to give birth?
Mutations cause many seemingly weird, or abnormal, things to become possible.. But scientists are also able to engineer many of these things as well.
outhouse
Atheistically
I used to hate Paul
Ask anyone here.
Took a class on Paul, I am now neutral on him as a person.
Pauls source was not rotten or impure.
Paul started nothing.
The movement was growing fast in the Empire, and Paul went along for a ride.
Paul was trying to be humble after realizing me made a mistake.
outhouse
Atheistically
No use racking your brain on something the biblical authors knew nothing about.
These authors were factually building divinity using rhetorical prose.
They nor anyone else at that time in the Empire knew of jesus birth or childhood, or teenage years.
Most of the bible deals with the last 3 years ish of his life.
The reason the main biblical source "Mark" is silent on all that, is because they did not know.
Most scholars claim the birth a literary creation.
Nativity of Jesus - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Most mainstream scholars do not see the Luke and Matthew nativity stories as historically factual
modern scholars generally do not use much of the birth narratives for historical information.
Last edited:
paarsurrey
Veteran Member
Bravo. That's what I want Christians to understand
paarsurrey
Veteran Member
Matemkar
Active Member
Salam. Though I do not like pretty much the way you said these things, I absolutely agree on everything you said about pure Lady Mary and Catholicism. ma salam
I've always been rather leery about Paul's epistles, but I have rather reconciled that by believing that Paul is more like an evangelist (such as, for example, Billy Graham) and that his epistles reflect as much. It's kind of hard to say, for sure, though, the way I see it.
sojourner
Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006
"Whether we live or die... we are the Lord's."
sojourner
Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006
Paul said that we are saved through the faith of Christ. Read Romans.
I believe this world and our experience of it is made up of our choices. Heaven is not a place or a time in the future, but the condition of ones being here and now, and "now" is the only reality. There is therefore no "afterlife", and heaven is always now, and we are either within heaven, or separated from it. Our choice of every moment determines that condition.
What was Paul really saying? I believe he was contrasting a belief that presumes that by following a bunch of external rules and conforming to them, a doctrine of works, is what determines one's status as "God's elect" or not. "I thank God I am not like this sinner!", is how Jesus expressed that mentality of 'salvation' through works expresses itself. So when Paul says we are save by faith, it is to contrast that mentality, a mentality which makes clean the outside of the cup and leaves the inside dirty.
It it through faith, which is itself choice of the highest order, BTW, we make clean the inside of the cup first and then the outside will follow. Everything begins inside, and to just put on clean robes when the heart is polluted is to be reduced to religious self-righteousness. So when Paul says, "For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; not as a result of works, so that no one may boast," it is saying that when you understand that our efforts alone are not what transforms us, that if we simply try to 'clean up our act' in our own efforts, we are not addressing the source of transformation, which is in fact Grace. And I personally define Grace as effortless acceptance, not something earned, not achieved, not accomplished. And how that Grace is allowed to be present within us, is through faith, which I define as facing the end of ourselves without fear and falling into the unknown, into death as it were, and simply trusting we will know Truth. My description of it here is a practical realization, not a theory, but the firsthand experience of what it is and how it works, on a daily basis in my personal meditation practices. It's how it works. And so when I hear people mouth Paul's words, it is typically coming from "ideas" not experience, so therefore the words sound right but end up somewhere else.
As I said, I see a balance to be struck between the 'faith only' crowd, and the 'pull yourself up by your bootstraps' crowd. Neither work, but a synthesis of practical practices in ridding ourselves of our own efforts to allow Grace to transform us, through our choice of faith. Both are at work.
To quote briefly something I read the other day I think explains this true paradox of "making an effort to make no effort",
The very desire to seek spiritual enlightenment is in fact nothing but the grasping tendency of the ego itself, and thus the very search for enlightenment prevents it. The "perfect practice" is therefore not to search for enlightenment but to inquire into the motive for seeking itself. You obviously seek in order to avoid the present, and yet the present alone hold the answer: to seek forever is to miss the point forever. You always already are enlightened Spirit, and therefore to seek Spirit is simply to deny Spirit. You can no more attain Spirit than you can attain your feet or acquire your lungs.
~Ken Wilber, One Taste, pg. 31
~Ken Wilber, One Taste, pg. 31
This is paradoxical, and is what I am saying, what my personal experience has taught me. Faith is not wishful thinking, it is through letting go, falling into the Unknown, that one finds what has been there all along. And it is Grace itself; Spirit. And that faith itself, is a gift of Spirit to seek itself in us. That is Truth; there is no "I" seeking, and hence no boasting, no accomplishments. The "I" that seeks is Spirit itself.
Last edited:
6 You see, at just the right time, when we were still powerless, Christ died for the ungodly. 7 Very rarely will anyone die for a righteous person, though for a good person someone might possibly dare to die. 8 But God demonstrates his own love for us in this: While we were still sinners, Christ died for us.
9 Since we have now been justified by his blood, how much more shall we be saved from God’s wrath through him! 10 For if, while we were God’s enemies, we were reconciled to him through the death of his Son, how much more, having been reconciled, shall we be saved through his life! 11 Not only is this so, but we also boast in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we have now received reconciliation.
By blood he meant sacrifice. And to be justified means to be saved
I must be a visionary
Last edited:
JM2C
CHRISTIAN
paarsurrey
Veteran Member
sojourner
Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006
You need to get a better grip on Paul. And you needn't call me "honey."
If you have understood everything, explain me the sentence
"We are now justified by his own blood"
and "we were reconciled through the death of his son"
sojourner
Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006
The blood was a sign that Jesus had fully cooperated in being human. Humans are mortal. They bleed. They die. Jesus did all of that, in accordance with the Father's wishes that the Son become fully human.
It was the act of God becoming totally Incarnate that reconciles us. That Incarnation became totally fulfilled when Jesus became subject to death.
blueman
God's Warrior
The law could never save us, so teaching us the law was not the purpose of His incarnation. His death paid the penalty for what we deserved for all who believe. His resurrection assures believers of eternal union with Him. You cannot be deemed righteous in God's eyes by observing the law.
sojourner
Annoyingly Progressive Since 2006
If you believe in Substitutionary Atonement, that's all fine-and-dandy. But a HUGE contingency of Xy doesn't buy that particular theological scheme. By adopting this stance, you've managed to completely circumvent the whole "I came to fulfill the Law" thing. If Jesus is the fulfillment of the Law, then I'd say that the Law certainly CAN save us.