Is Jesus God?

lil.guppy

lil.guppy

Active Member
Originally Posted by T316
http:///forum/post/3040502
And tampons are great for soaking things up, but I'd rather use a paper towel for most spills...

Care to debate human existance? I'm only suggesting that you respondants reply to the post at hand and not give us a new revised version on the King James Bible.
Dont use that in a quote if your a guy
 
prime311

prime311

Active Member
I would say if there is a god our view of him makes no sense. To me the old testament makes sense. God made us but he wants us to love him. He wants us to choose to love him, not be forced or made that way, and so he gives us free will. When we dont love him he becomes jealous and angry and takes his wrath out on mankind. Thats a picture of god that makes sense to me, because its consistent in its viewpoints of how god is. Basically God is an egomaniac. There is no 'we just cant understand him'. Man was made in gods own image it says. That means god can suffer from the same flaws that plague mankind. Anger, jealousy, we got these emotions from him, but an egomaniac god cant see his own problems and any human-writ book about him must show him as being perfect and omniscient. Organized Christianity's biggest flaw is its predication on a religion that doesn't fit the context of its own message.
I could take this further. An egomaniac god makes scary sense. An egomaniac god could send people to eternal damnation for not believing in him. The christian perfect, all loving, super nice guy god could never do this. What all knowing god could allow fallen angels and babies burned in eternal damnation? This leads to its own questions though. For instance what is hell? Hell is not just fire and brimstone, hell is described as an absence from gods presence. To an egomaniac like god what could be worse then not being with him? Maybe hell is a great place to be, just not in gods presence, theres no way of knowing these things. Maybe Jesus was god having a change of heart. A flawed all powerful being might be inclined to do these things.
 
wattsupdoc

wattsupdoc

Active Member
Originally Posted by T316
http:///forum/post/3040502
And tampons are great for soaking things up, but I'd rather use a paper towel for most spills...

Care to debate human existance? I'm only suggesting that you respondants reply to the post at hand and not give us a new revised version on the King James Bible.

MMMMM foosball....
 
mantisman51

mantisman51

Active Member
Flower, that is all good info. It is also why there has always been a Protestant movement. Luther brought it out into the open, but there have always been Christians who rejected the Roman Catholic doctrine for those very reasons.
 
darthtang aw

darthtang aw

Active Member
Originally Posted by wattsupdoc
http:///forum/post/3039242
The thing is, if he knew the outcome then he made NO SACRFICE.
In fact, giving up the flesh would have had his son become closer to him....

A soldier jumping on a grenade knows it will kill him, does this make it not a sacrifice to save his unit? Just because you know the outcome does not diminish the sacrifice any less.
 
wattsupdoc

wattsupdoc

Active Member
Originally Posted by Darthtang AW
http:///forum/post/3041567
A soldier jumping on a grenade knows it will kill him, does this make it not a sacrifice to save his unit? Just because you know the outcome does not diminish the sacrifice any less.
Absolutely, and you couldn't come up with a better analogy? This doesn't even compare. The soldier knows the outcome, and it's going to be his death. Jesus is hung on the cross, he dies and then is resurrected...He knew this outcome. At that time the term sacrifice meant to slaughter something. To offer up a life. If no life is given there cant be a sacrifice as god would have required. Now, why would have jesus have been resurrected? Why would he have retained his physical form? If he was to be taken"up to heaven" then what purpose is it of being of the flesh? Obviously, he wasn't. He walked the Earth, married, had children.
Even if he did die on the cross and was "lifted to heaven". God himself never made any kind of sacrifice. How could he have? When Jesus gave up the spirit on the cross, God was united with him. For God this would be more of a birth than a death. For Jesus, it was a tribulation to go through. Pain to endure as he was of the flesh. What a person might call a sacrifice in some sense. But not at all what was considered a sacrifice at the time.
 
darthtang aw

darthtang aw

Active Member
Originally Posted by wattsupdoc
http:///forum/post/3041955
Absolutely, and you couldn't come up with a better analogy? This doesn't even compare. The soldier knows the outcome, and it's going to be his death. Jesus is hung on the cross, he dies and then is resurrected...He knew this outcome. At that time the term sacrifice meant to slaughter something. To offer up a life. If no life is given there cant be a sacrifice as god would have required. Now, why would have jesus have been resurrected? Why would he have retained his physical form? If he was to be taken"up to heaven" then what purpose is it of being of the flesh? Obviously, he wasn't. He walked the Earth, married, had children.
Even if he did die on the cross and was "lifted to heaven". God himself never made any kind of sacrifice. How could he have? When Jesus gave up the spirit on the cross, God was united with him. For God this would be more of a birth than a death. For Jesus, it was a tribulation to go through. Pain to endure as he was of the flesh. What a person might call a sacrifice in some sense. But not at all what was considered a sacrifice at the time.

You are missing what the sacrifice is. The soldier was a bad analogy as I didn't understand which angle you were looking at it from. Now I do.
The sacrifice was the journey to get to point of death. The suffering, the pain, the bleeding, the accousting, the humiliation, The torture, the acceptance of all the hatred. This is where Jesus sacrificed. at anytime he could have ended it all, but the journey was the sacrificial part....
Now on to god and his part of his sacrifice, as a father, would you be able to sacrifice your feelings and personal connection to protect your children and watch them go through all of this and not attempt to save them? That in itself is also a sacrifice.
If you haven't watch passion of the christ, while only a movie, it gives a great depiction of trial and tribulations before his death....it gives one a greater understanding of the entire sacrifice.
Keep in mind I am the last one to be defending religion as I no longer attend church nor do I live the life I should...but if we are discussing the story as it is written and how it can be viewed as a sacrifice, then I believe I have explained that in as great of detail as needed.
 
uneverno

uneverno

Active Member
Originally Posted by Darthtang AW
http:///forum/post/3042164
The sacrifice was the journey to get to point of death. The suffering, the pain, the bleeding, the accousting, the humiliation, The torture, the acceptance of all the hatred. This is where Jesus sacrificed. at anytime he could have ended it all, but the journey was the sacrificial part....
I disagree. From the point of view of an Omnipotent God, all of that is known. In addition, per the book, 1000 years is as a day to "God." From that perspective, 30 odd years of the above is the equivalent of a cosmic flea bite. Pain in the a**, sure, but a sacrifice? No.
Now on to god and his part of his sacrifice, as a father, would you be able to sacrifice your feelings and personal connection to protect your children and watch them go through all of this and not attempt to save them? That in itself is also a sacrifice.
I'm not sure how that's relevant. Again, given Omnipotence/Omniscience, still not a sacrifice. It sounds more like "god" was trying to teach a lesson. Whom god was trying to teach this lesson to (his protoge, or humanity), or what the lesson was, is entirely unclear to me.
It all smacks of theanthropism, i.e. attributing human characteristics to a diety.
That I understand the purpose of.
 
darthtang aw

darthtang aw

Active Member
Originally Posted by uneverno
http:///forum/post/3042520
I disagree. From the point of view of an Omnipotent God, all of that is known. In addition, per the book, 1000 years is as a day to "God." From that perspective, 30 odd years of the above is the equivalent of a cosmic flea bite. Pain in the a**, sure, but a sacrifice? No.
I'm not sure how that's relevant. Again, given Omnipotence/Omniscience, still not a sacrifice. It sounds more like "god" was trying to teach a lesson. Whom god was trying to teach this lesson to (his protoge, or humanity), or what the lesson was, is entirely unclear to me.
It all smacks of theanthropism, i.e. attributing human characteristics to a diety.
That I understand the purpose of.

In the grand scheme of our lives is watching your mother die not the same? Time plays no factor on this as sacrifice is determined in the moment. Sure god is all compassing and omnipotent, however the sacrifice was not from the entity GOD in view but in the entity of the son.,..the son sacrificed.
The willingness to place your physical body through such torture, even for a short amount of time is still sacrifice. Look at all the news and rhetoric regarding 45 seconds of waterboarding. In the grand scheme of the prisoner's life this is the equivalent to a cosmic flea bite....Yet this is viewed as a huge autrocity.....I am having a hard time saying what I am thinking, I hope this conveys correct.
 
uneverno

uneverno

Active Member
Not sure what that's supposed to demonstrate.
1907 physics believed as fact that all which exists must have mass.
e=mc² says otherwise.
 
uneverno

uneverno

Active Member
Originally Posted by Darthtang AW
http:///forum/post/3042538
Time plays no factor on this as sacrifice is determined in the moment.
Well, we could get extremely obscure here and debate the existence of Time as a reality at all.
I'm prepared to argue that Time's existence is a human invention, created for the purposes of explaining things conveniently. That it is, in fact, a mathematical tool (akin to "i" - the square root of -1), not a reality.
Sure god is all compassing and omnipotent, however the sacrifice was not from the entity GOD in view but in the entity of the son.,..the son sacrificed.
Alright, for the moment, let's assume I accept that. Sacrificed what, for whom, and why?
The willingness to place your physical body through such torture, even for a short amount of time is still sacrifice. Look at all the news and rhetoric regarding 45 seconds of waterboarding. In the grand scheme of the prisoner's life this is the equivalent to a cosmic flea bite....Yet this is viewed as a huge autrocity.....I am having a hard time saying what I am thinking, I hope this conveys correct.
No worries - I'm not sure I'm conveying my point of view all that clearly either.
 
wattsupdoc

wattsupdoc

Active Member
Sure god is all compassing and omnipotent, however the sacrifice was not from the entity GOD in view but in the entity of the son.,..the son sacrificed.
Here's the rub.... Since you believe this is the case. Then if in fact Jesus is God as the doctrine dictates. Jesus is omnipotent. And in fact because they are one, no sacrifice has been made. So which is it then? The divine trinity, or not?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top