Jesus documentary part two..

[Christy]

To start a new thread.... Did anyone watch it? Anyone watching the after show hosted by Ted Koppel, the elitist jackass?

I didn't watch the show start to finish, but personally, from what I did see, I didn't find anything in it that I found to be insulting towards Christianity. :shrug:

 

[2ndAmendment]

To start a new thread.... Did anyone watch it? Anyone watching the after show hosted by Ted Koppel, the elitist jackass?

I didn't watch the show start to finish, but personally, from what I did see, I didn't find anything in it that I found to be insulting towards Christianity. :shrug:

You mean other than the fact that it attempts to tear the heart out of Christianity by stating that Jesus is not God, was not resurrected, and His bones are in some box?

 

[Midnightrider]

You mean other than the fact that it attempts to tear the heart out of Christianity by stating that Jesus is not God, was not resurrected, and His bones are in some box?

I didn't see the whole thing, but i didn't see where it suggested either of the first two, only that they think they may have found the bones.

And i'll be honest, even if they could prove that those were jesus' remains it wouldn't mean he wasn't a god, or that he wanb't resurrected, only that his body, didn't asend to heaven, his soul and spirit could have easily......

 

[itsbob]

You mean other than the fact that it attempts to tear the heart out of Christianity by stating that Jesus is not God, was not resurrected, and His bones are in some box?

Truth hurts only when it needs to.

 

[2ndAmendment]

I didn't see the whole thing, but i didn't see where it suggested either of the first two, only that they think they may have found the bones.

And i'll be honest, even if they could prove that those were jesus' remains it wouldn't mean he wasn't a god, or that he wanb't resurrected, only that his body, didn't asend to heaven, his soul and spirit could have easily......

The body of Jesus ascending into heaven was witnessed and testified to by many. The assertion that the ascension did not occur as testified to is a slap at Christianity.

 

[2ndAmendment]

Truth hurts only when it needs to.

Like the truth that you are a sinner and in need of salvation? We are praying for you.

 

[Midnightrider]

The body of Jesus ascending into heaven was witnessed and testified to by many. The assertion that the ascension did not occur as testified to is a slap at Christianity.

only to those who take the bible literally. Most folks dont take it so literally, and therefore might not be nearly as threatened by the idea that his body remained and his spirit rose, and that the story of his assension was a fable like numerous other instances in the bible.

 

[itsbob]

Like the truth that you are a sinner and in need of salvation? We are praying for you.

Nope, I'm good thanks.

 

[2ndAmendment]

only to those who take the bible literally. Most folks dont take it so literally, and therefore might not be nearly as threatened by the idea that his body remained and his spirit rose, and that the story of his assension was a fable like numerous other instances in the bible.

You are right, most don't. Wish everyone would heed the warning. It is kind of like those that choose to stay in New Orleans when they were told Katrina was on the way. They stayed and died. Sad. but the were warned. The Bible is mankind's warning. The day of judgment is coming; here is the way to salvation; it is a free gift to accept or reject; here is the way. So most people say. "It just an old book. There is no God. I can do what I want to. There will be on consequences. When you're dead, you are just dead." Sad, but the road and gate are wide on the path of destruction.

 

[2ndAmendment]

Nope, I'm good thanks.

Knew that would be your thoughts. We are praying for you anyway. Just did again.

 

[Christy]

You mean other than the fact that it attempts to tear the heart out of Christianity by stating that Jesus is not God, was not resurrected, and His bones are in some box?

See, I don't see where that "tears at the heart of Christianity" at all. The body is merely a vessel for the spirit right? Why would it make any difference if his actual physical body remained? And why not continue with the scientific research? Why are Christians so bent about doing any type of scientific study?

 

[2ndAmendment]

See, I don't see where that "tears at the heart of Christianity" at all. The body is merely a vessel for the spirit right? Why would it make any difference if his actual physical body remained? And why not continue with the scientific research? Why are Christians so bent about doing any type of scientific study?

I'm not bent about scientific study.

"Why would it make any difference if his actual physical body remained?" You really don't see do you? I think that is sad. It goes to whether the Bible is right or wrong. Period. If any part of the Bible is not trustworthy, none of it is trustworthy. I think you have expressed that you don't really believe in the Bible but consider yourself a Christian. Maybe that was someone else. I don't really remember, but I find that those that think that way incredulous.

In the other thread on this, it was asked why the "scholars" waited so long to produce this program. Opinion - money and Christian bashing is more accepted now than it was in the 1980s when these bone boxes were found.

 

[2ndAmendment]

Jesus documentary part ... 03-05-2007 11:52 AM your name has been passed on to my many muslim friends, they will make sure to pass it along so that soon you will have millions of people praying that your soul is saved by the one true god, Allah

Midnight, you need to have more courage. Sign your karma.

 

[itsbob]

Why are Christians so bent about doing any type of scientific study?

The one time the church agreed to a Scientific study was when they were 100% sure they were right.. and in no way would science disprove it..

It took scientists about a month to debunk the Shroud of Turin. The shroud was a fake, but did they destroy it? Admit they were wrong? No, they declared it was bad science even though three idependent research facilities dated it all in the same window.. from 12 - 1300. It's still on display as one of the most righteous of religous artifacts.

It's been asked of the Vatican, since you say it was bad science etc, let someone else test it.. they refuse.

 

[Tonio]

Opinion - money and Christian bashing is more accepted now than it was in the 1980s when these bone boxes were found.

Criticism of Christianity's doctrine doesn't equate to bashing of Christians. That applies to all religions.

And when some people offer juvenile insults of you and other Christians instead of reasoned criticism of the religion's doctrine, you are certainly entitled to your anger.

 

[SamSpade]

See, I don't see where that "tears at the heart of Christianity" at all. The body is merely a vessel for the spirit right? Why would it make any difference if his actual physical body remained? And why not continue with the scientific research? Why are Christians so bent about doing any type of scientific study?

I don't know about scientific study - but I can cite numerous doctrine, Christian apologetics and Biblical references that claim the same thing - if Jesus wasn't raised from the dead, then he died for nothing, because his resurrection was the entire reason he came in the first place, and he said so himself.

I'm not even of the type that criticizes cherry picking of the Bible, because I do believe there's a bit of it that has no relevance to today - such as women being silent in church, for example - or are likely fictional allegory intended to instruct rather than to be taken as straight history - such as Job - but the resurrection is the single most important event in Christianity. If it didn't happen, then Christianity itelf is false. If it did happen then Christianity is true, and apologists from Paul to Justin Martyr all the way down to the present have begun from that point. "I resolve to know nothing but Jesus and him crucified." They all point to the empty tomb as the point of Christianity.

Shrugging off all the accounts, witnesses and teachings subsequent to it - to Easter itself - and attributing it to "maybe his SPIRIT rose" pretty much denies his divinity, because leaving bones and a spirit going to heaven is what we all thought the rest of us did. The reason he even COULD die for our sins was being divine.

So, yeah - KIND OF important. Jesus' bones means, the religion is false.

I'm not AGAINST scrutiny, but if you plan to debunk one of the world's major religions, you need good evidence. It's still true that extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof.

 

[Tonio]

I'm not even of the type that criticizes cherry picking of the Bible, because I do believe there's a bit of it that has no relevance to today - such as women being silent in church, for example - or are likely fictional allegory intended to instruct rather than to be taken as straight history - such as Job - but the resurrection is the single most important event in Christianity.

I would go further than that, suggesting that all scripture in all religions can be seen as allegory insted of literal fact. The Resurrection is one story that shows up again and again in religions, such as Horus in ancient Egypt. The Virgin Birth is another such story. Many critics of Christianity claim that early Christians simply borrowed these stories. I think these critics are missing the larger picture, ignoring any deeper meaning to be found in the stories.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/g/a/2002/11/15/notes111502.DTL&nl=fix

The virgin birth did not actually happen. It is simply a metaphor for the birth of pure compassion and spiritual feeling in the heart of man. Christ's body did not fly out of a cave and rise to the pretty blue sky. It is a symbol for man moving inward, opening to his spiritual self...

From the Bible to the Upanishads, the Koran to the teachings of the Buddha, Greek myth to American Indian folklore, the similarities between beliefs, their borrowed deities, their shared iconography, their reinvented tales and common themes, are all revealed to be so astonishingly interconnected, so obviously cut from the same internal psychological cloth, and so beautifully a part of all cultures, that to wage war in the name of one is to wage war on them all.

And to think of any one as superior to the others is to do violence to the very ideas and energies they illumine, and only serves to isolate, and enrage, and induce severe diarrhetic paranoia.

 

[aps45819]

You mean other than the fact that it attempts to tear the heart out of Christianity by stating that Jesus is not God, was not resurrected, and His bones are in some box?

Other than that Mrs. Lincoln, how was the play?

 

[SamSpade]

I think these critics are missing the larger picture, ignoring any deeper meaning to be found in the stories.

I think much IS relevant as far as whether or not it happened. In a nutshell, Paul said if it didn't happen, let us eat drink and be merry, for tomorrow we die. That if it isn't true, Christians are the most pitiable of all men, because it means they're NOT freed from their sins - and their destiny is to rot in the grave. Pretty poor, if you're banking on your treasure being in heaven, right? It's like working your whole life for something - and getting robbed.

I realize that, to someone who does NOT profess faith in any religion - or as I see it, pays lip service to some vague amalgam of all religion but none in particular and which amounts to the same - it really is all just the same stuff, and fights amongst religions is just a matter of saying that my imaginary friend is better than your imaginary friend.

When someone actually professes a religion - they dedicate no small part of their life to it. If someone could definitively prove to Muslims that the Koran was a fake (which basically was the premise of The Satanic Verses) - do you think they'd pray 5 times a day, eschew alcohol, give alms, travel to Mecca, do all those things? Would the Mother Theresas and other missionaries put their lives on the line, if their religion really had no significance over any other? Believing it to be true IS what gives them strength to do these things. I'm not saying this proves anything, but I am saying that choosing a religion is not like choosing a favorite basketball team. When you choose, if you do, you put your life into it, because you believe it.

I'm not for thinking that if they all sort of seem to borrow from the same elements that's any kind of proof that they're all WRONG. That's not even logical. If anything - IF there's any validity to religion at all, it means they're all approaching the truth, which is kind of the way I look at it. It's how I see that verse where Paul says we see through a glass darkly - I understand it to mean at some point when we face God, we'll realize we never saw the whole picture clearly, but then, we will - it will make sense then. Not because some truth was hidden, but because we're just not able to see it as men, and which is why some things are better taken on faith.

 

[Tonio]

IIn a nutshell, Paul said if it didn't happen, let us eat drink and be merry, for tomorrow we die. That if it isn't true, Christians are the most pitiable of all men, because it means they're NOT freed from their sins - and their destiny is to rot in the grave.

To help me understand your point, would you explain it in a way that doesn't assume that Christian doctrine is literally true? Specifically the doctrine of sin. Christianity presupposes both original sin and freedom from that sin. That sounds to me like a circular argument.

Believing it to be true IS what gives them strength to do these things. I'm not saying this proves anything, but I am saying that choosing a religion is not like choosing a favorite basketball team. When you choose, if you do, you put your life into it, because you believe it.

My point is that such belief often leads to enormous harm as well as enormous good. Mother Theresa and Torquemada both believed they were fulfulling the will of God. It may be possible that their actions were due mostly to their personalities, and that they were using their religion as justification. But how can we really know? When people believe to their core that they are fulfilling the will of deity, does that lead them to see themselves as unaccountable to their fellow humans? I know that may sound incredibly unfair to religious people, and I apologize for any offense. Still, I think it's a legitimate question, especially in light of doctrines such as Islam's bribe of virgins in paradise for martyrs. (Scholars believe that "virgin" was a mistranslation of "grape.")

If anything - IF there's any validity to religion at all, it means they're all approaching the truth, which is kind of the way I look at it.

That is part of my point. "Facing God" may itself be a metaphor for spiritual fulfillment, and it wouldn't have to involve a single supreme being giving orders to humanity.