-->
@RationalMadman
It's random. Hence the "random OR"
RELIGION POLL #1: Resurrection
Posts
Total:
140
-->
@EtrnlVw
@fauxlaw
Interesting points. But let me ask you this:
Does the fact that the men of the gospels were actively trying to spread the faith have any impact on the credibility of their testimonies?
-->
@PressF4Respect
By their fruit you shall know them
-->
@User_2006
While some consider the world overpopulated, I maintain that the planet does not suffer overpopulation; it suffers poor distribution of both people and resources. The fact is, at 7B in population there is sufficient land mass on earth in just actively agricultural and arable [ag land not actively cultivated] to give every man, woman, and child on earth over 1 acre each, and that does not include using urban, mountainous, arctic, forest or rain forest, or desert land as currently constituted. I did A graduate whit paper study on the subject, and updated it last year. We are just poor land managers. For example, in the U.S., why has no one built aqueducts from the confluence of the Mississippi/Missouri rivers to te southwest to relive the resulting flood plain of the lower Mississippi? It would solve at least two problems: flooding in one region, and desert in another. No, instead we throw billions away recovering from the results of both unbearable conditions.
Second, who says we all have to live here?
-->
@MisterChris
Well, just about every religion centred creation hypothesis is embellished with humanity based mythology.... In fact I cannot readily think of any examples that aren't.
And I have never seen any evidence to suggest that popular Abrahamism is any different.
-->
@MisterChris
So, in your OP you claim to be curious and researching into it. Every post you made since then makes you seem like a hardened antitheist with a corrupt agenda of pretending to care and feign interest while trying only to discredit.
-->
@RationalMadman
Perhaps they are a toughened sceptic, rather than a hardened anti-theist.
Though perhaps, hardened/toughened theists don't even bother to feign to care...they simply attempt only to discredit.
Just a couple of observation based suggestions.
And if I'm going to be known as a fruit....I'd like to be a plum.
-->
@zedvictor4
literally nothing you have replied to me in the past few months has been coherent or relevant to what I posted.
-->
@RationalMadman
So a couple of simple questions relevent to your reply ( # 36) that you might understand then.
Why is christopher_best a hardened anti-theist rather than a toughened sceptic?
Are hardened theists not also possibly corrupt?
-->
@PressF4Respect
Did they have any personal gain from the spread of the faith? Didn't they end up executed for it? You would think they would give it up if their lives were on the line.
-->
@RationalMadman
I have done nothing but question further or inject some thoughts into my replies. I have not taken an explicit position on anything here. You are being needlessly critical of a harmless post.
-->
@MisterChris
What makes ancient people more morally fallible? I'm not sure I follow.
Bc of the divide bw being someone and being nothing. If a lie could make you into someone, or give you a comfortable living... then, one would have lied through their teeth.
-->
@MisterChris
Considering the fact that the Judeo-Roman relationship wasn't exactly good, there is certainly a reason why they would want to do that. Namely, they would want a figure to galvanize the Jewish peoples to stand up against the Romans. Making that figurehead appear mystical would make the Jewish people believe them more, and it would certainly boost morale (knowing that there is a messenger who says God is on their side).
-->
@MisterChris
I like the take. I agree that it probably boils down to testimony. I am interested to hear arguments as to why the apostles could be lying, though.
This is where it gets interesting, I don't think with such convictions they lived their lives that they could be lying. Are they somehow mistaken? IDK but I'm sure they weren't lying.
I think your argument about Jesus' resurrection is interesting, especially the idea of taking what is useful and ignoring the rest
Not really ignoring the rest, that's not what I wrote, there's more of a process here so I'm trying to get you to focus on what counts. I'm not ignoring it, it's just not applicable so it doesn't matter if it happened and so doesn't really matter whether or not I accept it, at least not relevant to anything I could gain from it. Even if Jesus rose from the grave and we met Him in the afterlife do you really think He's gonna ask "DID YOU BELIEVE I ROSE FROM THE GRAVE"?......lol, no I don't think so, if anything He might ask "did you consider my teachings, and have you applied them". This goes back to my guitar teaching analogy. To become a guitar player it doesn't matter what you "believe", it matters whether or not you practiced (applied) that which would make you one. Then once you actually have become one (through application), then your belief about your playing is worth something. So if you're interested in the Gospels your focus should be on that which would produce results in your life.
but I'd argue that the most useful thing of all is the verification that Jesus is the Messiah. If that is true, then it means you have a pathway into an afterlife, and that seems useful as hell to me.
If you can't verify that Jesus rose from the grave how will you ever know whether He is the Messiah? this is my point, you may never know that it happened and so what is left? The only thing you can verify is the teachings and principles themselves and what they produce. So the only way to have a pathway into the Christians Kingdom of God is through application not trying to verify the resurrection. This is where the rubber meets the road, how you gain that pathway. To become a guitar player you actually have to do something to become one, to become a Christian you actually have to do something to become one.
It is not going to matter whether you believed He rose from the grave or not, what matters is did you apply what was applicable. We will never know whether it happened, all we have is belief in it. But if I wanted to get you interested in the Gospels I wouldn't say you need to believe Jesus rose from the grave, I would get you to look at the practicality of the teachings themselves and have you apply them to yourself so that you can observe something from them. Jesus is a teacher, so He will give you things to practice or apply, what He did is irrelevant to your own progression.
Religious sources would probably say you need to believe in this or that (without verification) to be a Christian but I say no....you need to first apply what is being taught (doer), learn from it and then you might have the confidence to believe other things later once you realize there's things to interact with, and so you learn to trust it.
The only way to verify Jesus is the Messiah would be to see if there's anything to what He taught, what do those teachings produce, what does Jesus claim you will get if you do this or that ect ect. You have to be a doer not a believer if you know what I mean by that, one is an application and produces something the other is just believing in something.
Again, I could "believe" Jesus walked on water so what? what does that do? how does that make me a follower of the Messiah?
But, I could also apply "But the hour cometh, and now is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit and in truth: for the Father seeketh such to worship him. God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth." or "Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind."
Which one do you think would qualify you as a Christian? believing something or doing something? This goes back to the analogy I wrote, believing you are a guitar player doesn't make you one lol, only when you practice to become one are you one. That's a doer not just a believer. So I would get you to focus first on application not beliefs.
Anyway, thanks for the post!
You're welcome! you seem like a cool person....I'm just trying to get you interested in something deeper here or notice something different.
Just to add though, there's many pathways into the afterlife and creation has many layers so it depends on what you desire and what your interests are. But if it is the Kingdom of Heaven ("Christians" paradise) then you have to be an applier, a doer to gain access to that particular planet.
-->
@PressF4Respect
Does the fact that the men of the gospels were actively trying to spread the faith have any impact on the credibility of their testimonies?
I would say the fact that they were trying to spread the faith is what gives credibility to their testimonies. Actually it's the convictions they lived by is what makes them convincing, there was a powerful religious regime in control of that part of the world and the danger of them opposing that was very great. There was no reason for any ordinary men to make up some silly stories just to be persecuted. I don't buy that at all. But personally I think there is a deeper infrastructure to the Gospels than the miracles. So, they aren't really relevant to you guys in a meaningful way. It would be cool if we could prove them true but I think there's more to the Gospels that are useful.
-->
@MisterChris
You would think they would give it up if their lives were on the line.
There comes a point in the progression toward the ultimate Christian ethic when even death is no longer a barrier to be feared. It becomes merely a door of passage from one existence to the next. The Gospel of Jesus Christ is a road of eternal progression whose ultimate aim is to become like God, as expressed in Matthew 5:48, which is the culmination of the first chapter of the Sermon on the Mount: "Be ye therefore perfect, even as your Father in Heaven is perfect." That goal is not necessary to achieve in this lifetime, but, as said, death is merely a portal out of mortality and into immortality, a time of everlasting growth and advancement in knowledge and experience. For some, such as the apostles facing death, that punishment is sweet because they die in the Lord's embrace. What better place to be?
-->
@fauxlaw
Yep....Mythology...And you have no way of proving otherwise.
Nonetheless, that is not to imply that the naivety of the message does not contain a basic representation of a purpose.
Strip away the mythology from most religions and you are left with the same basic principle.
And non-religious people such as myself, also tend not to be nihilistic.
-->
@zedvictor4
Yep....Mythology...And you have no way of proving otherwise
And, being neither religious nor nihilistic, yours is the unenviable position of having no principle to prove. That's at best, tepid.
-->
@Outplayz
@PressF4Respect
The main question I'd ask both of you is, do you think they would have pursued this at the cost of their lives? The records show they died brutally, but continued to worship until the end. I don't think I'd die for a lie, so this is the most compelling rebuttal I can think of.
-->
@zedvictor4
Yep....Mythology...And you have no way of proving otherwise.
And you can't seem to get it through your conditioned pile of internal data that you have no way of knowing what are stories and what is factual, that is your own dilemma (not others). So basically you categorizing anything as "myths" is nothing but a guess on your part.
Application is where that dilemma ends and where experience/knowing begins. Expertise is how one "proves" otherwise, spirituality is gained through application and observation not guesswork or beliefs. Once you enter that arena through interaction and participation then you can voice an opinion, otherwise your posts are just worthless chatter.
-->
@EtrnlVw
Thanks for that reply and clarification. I think your philosophy is one of the more compelling ones shared here. But I am wondering how your "be a doer" philosophy is compatible with the Biblical "you can't be saved apart from the Resurrection." In the Bible, it is very clear that apart from the Resurrection, our debts for sin could never be paid.
So in a way, all the effort you put means nothing. You will be a virtuous person if you try to follow Jesus' teachings, I think, but you will have opted out of saving if you reject the resurrection (or the idea that Jesus was God).
So, I doubt Jesus will ask "do you believe I rose?" but I think he will ask "did you trust in me?"
Anyway, how would you reconcile that apparent contradiction?
-->
@MisterChris
do you think they would have pursued this at the cost of their lives?
They would only be guessing of course, and while I think Outplayz actually has a credible opinion on many spiritual topics he doesn't see the purpose of religious experience yet in his platform. Or maybe he does and just finds it a bit boring or inconsequential. There's a place for all these experiences within the universal Platform, they serve a purpose in the souls progression, but not all experiences are for every soul either.
-->
@EtrnlVw
What do you mean by "platform?"
-->
@MisterChris
Thanks for that reply and clarification. I think your philosophy is one of the more compelling ones shared here. But I am wondering how your "be a doer" philosophy is compatible with the Biblical "you can't be saved apart from the Resurrection."
You'll have to provide verses or passages from Jesus' teachings so that we aren't muddling the accuracy of this topic with dogma. It's important that you are actually familiar with the Gospels if you want to have a meaningful discussion.
Here are some verses in line with what I'm saying, these are what make the difference between gaining the Kingdom of heaven and not.
“Either make the tree good, and his fruit good; or else make the tree corrupt, and his fruit corrupt: for the tree is known by his fruit.”
“For whosoever shall DO the will of my Father which is in heaven, the same is my brother, and sister, and mother.”
"I am the living bread which came down from heaven: if any man eat of this bread, he shall live for ever: and the bread that I will give is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world."
"Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day."
"He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me, and I in him."
"16 You will know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes from thornbushes or figs from thistles? 17 Even so, every good tree bears good fruit, but a bad tree bears bad fruit. 18 A good tree cannot bear bad fruit, nor can a bad tree bear good fruit. 19 Every tree that does not bear good fruit is cut down and thrown into the fire. 20 Therefore by their fruits you will know them.
21 “Not everyone who says to Me, ‘Lord, Lord,’ shall enter the kingdom of heaven, but he who does the will of My Father in heaven."
And just so you know, Jesus isn't saying that you need to literally eat His flesh and drink His blood lol, these are analogous to the principle of application. When you "eat His flesh and drink His blood" you are applying that which he taught, in other words being a doer.
In the Bible, it is very clear that apart from the Resurrection, our debts for sin could never be paid.
Actually to be clear, it was His death not resurrection that paved a bridge. But again, I'm not saying there was no resurrection.
So in a way, all the effort you put means nothing. You will be a virtuous person if you try to follow Jesus' teachings, I think, but you will have opted out of saving if you reject the resurrection (or the idea that Jesus was God).So, I doubt Jesus will ask "do you believe I rose?" but I think he will ask "did you trust in me?"
No, the effort you put into application is the only thing that can be substantial, otherwise you're doing nothing, if you do nothing what have you gained? Again, I never said to ignore or opt out of the resurrection I only say it's not important for your progression, but you have no way to verify it. The only thing that qualifies you as Christian is what you do and how you live your life. Whether or not you believe in a resurrection is immaterial, you only need to apply that which is applicable. I thought I made that pretty clear with the guitar analogy.
Trust comes with confidence, confidence comes through experience and experience comes through application.
Anyway, how would you reconcile that apparent contradiction?
I don't think there is a contradiction in what I'm saying and the actual teachings of Jesus.
-->
@MisterChris
What do you mean by "platform?"
The Platform is what Outplayz and I refer to as the original Source. Some call that Source God, but It is basically the Source out of which everything has their existence, out of which all things originate.
It is this omnipresent, incorporeal universal ocean of consciousness that all Gods, demi-gods, incarnation, souls, creatures and of course the multiverse are thought of and formed.
The Hindus call this "Brahman", same concept really....
-->
@MisterChris
The main question I'd ask both of you is, do you think they would have pursued this at the cost of their lives? The records show they died brutally, but continued to worship until the end. I don't think I'd die for a lie, so this is the most compelling rebuttal I can think of.
This is the problem with looking at something so old. There could be many reasons 1) they didn't think they would die brutally; 2) their ego made them think they were above it all if people believed them; 3) maybe they did say they were lying in the end, but since they died... the killers got to write/spread the history of it and to save face they didn't retract the lie; 4) They may have truly been deluded to their own lie by the end... etc. Those 4 came to mind right off the bat.
-->
@MisterChris
The main question I'd ask both of you is, do you think they would have pursued this at the cost of their lives? The records show they died brutally, but continued to worship until the end. I don't think I'd die for a lie, so this is the most compelling rebuttal I can think of.
Yes, actually. Some people would be willing to die in order to galvanize their communities. Also, they believed in an eternal afterlife.
-->
@fauxlaw
I would suggest at best, logical.
I run with certain unprovable principles just the same as you do...Though yours are perhaps somewhat more cosmetically embellished than mine.
-->
@EtrnlVw
Spirituality is gained through a physiological response to a certain stimulus....That is to say, that you create spirituality inside your own head because you wish to create spirituality inside your own head.
And within the myth there are obvious facts and there is obvious fantasy.
-->
@zedvictor4
certain unprovable principles
Virtually all animals of the earth have 5 senses shared with humans, and some have others in addition that function as proof of earth sciences, such as echo location and earth's magnetic field, yet you deny humans of any additional senses of empiric proof? We, the highest being on earth's evolutionary ladder, and we are restricted to five empiric proofs? Argue for your limitations; they're yours.