Really? You think the story of Jesus is beyond human comprehension? I see it as a kludge of a story made up by not too smart people who wanted to turn a failed messiah into a god.

Anyone who comes up with a story about an immortal god sacrificing his life for humanity is a taco short of a combination platter.

Bluefire wrote:

Perhaps for you.

Facts do not rely on your opinion, but reside outside of it.

My common sense got the idea about you being a smart ass. Kind of funny. Thought you would realize that. Oh, well. LOL

A lot of Creationism doubters use that assertion [above]. Can't really consider it valid until they give me a reasonable amount of accurate information to change my mind. Show me the facts! LOL

Jesus said, "For all they that take the sword shall perish with the sword."

Matthew 26:52

A little confusing.

Not confusing at all if you consider the entire Bible.

The bottom line is: you can't say that a life was sacrificed if the person or animal didn't die and is still dead today. When Christians say that Jesus died for their sins they imply that Jesus made the ultimate, final sacrifice. In reality Jesus appeared dead for three days for our sins and then got up and was seeing walking about.

Bluefire wrote:
Not confusing at all if you consider the entire Bible.

I am going to guess that if I ask for an explanation, you'll tell me to figure it out for myself.

What do you mean? What about the entire Bible?

That's what happens when you have one working mythology, but then a bunch of renegade schismatics attempts to hijack that mythology with a poorly-slapped-together sequel made up of disparate bits and pieces arbitrarily collected from here and there, even including some custom-written outright apologetic propaganda (Gospel of John, I'm looking at your sorry ass): you end up with a bunch of contradictions that then have to be clumsily rationalized and justified, and most of those FAIL on arrival anyway, because some other desperate rationalizer/justifier is earnestly promoting HIS own clumsy and awkward apologetic line of doctrinal consumer products.

Everyone in the belief-merchandising biz sure wants their piece of THAT action.

Christians have been successfully promoting the idea for thousands of years.  If they were making as rudimentary a mistake as you imply they never would have convinced so many people.  You need to make more allowance for some mysterianism and hand-waving.

You speak as if you were on the logical side of the argument, having merely replaced words to present yourself as an informed Christian. For example, "creationism doubters"....  Used the same way a thinking person would refer to climate change doubters or evolution doubters, except that for these cases it is a reference to someone who continually buries their head in the sand and refuses to accept scientific data as evidence, while embracing Bronze Age conjecture as infallible truth. It's simple deception that you are engaging in.

Think about what dead means. This is one of the most unambiguous words I can think of. It's binary, you are either dead or you are not. Not much room for nuances, shades of gray. When Christians say "Jesus died for our sins" they use the word dead. But if you ask them if Jesus is dead they will say that he is not dead. So which one is it?

Another angle: let's say a member of your family was thought to be dead because he appeared dead for three days, then was seen walking around and then he disappeared. Would you still be saying that he died or would you be saying that he almost died and then disappeared?

There are more things at the core of the story that don't make sense at all.

What about the idea of sacrificing the life of an immortal god? Makes sense? No. Sorry dude who came up with this, you can't have a cake and eat it too. You can't have an all powerful immortal god and have him killed to exploit the guilt trip/sob story factors.

What about the idea of a god staying angry for thousands of years and then sending his son (which is himself) to die so he can stop being angry.

The story of holy Trinity. Makes no sense at all. It's just an attempt to go around the one god limit in the first commandment.

So the original Jesus is dead then? He died?

I believe that there is a good possibility that Jesus was an actual historical figure, and he may have survived the crucifixion, and then gone into hiding.  He may have been dosed with a drug, supplied by his Mom to give him the appearance of death so that the Romans would cut him down early.  If that theory is correct, then he physically died at a later date.

*sigh*

The word "fact" is so irresponsibly thrown around.

100% BS.

There is ZERO credible attestation of any of that other than the bible itself. Some wide-eyed schismatic preacher who may or may not have actually been named Yeshua was likely born just so he could get his ass crucified for wandering around blaspheming.

THAT'S IT.

The rest is pure mythology, and has NO reliable historical attestation whatsoever.

NONE. ZIP. NADA.

No, that in itself is also 100% BS.

While his mythology has allowed a whole mess of folks to stumble around prancing and posturing around, being all high and mighty and stuff, the FACT remains that the state of the world PROVES the bible is an ABJECT FAILURE at having a "positive effect" on mankind or inspiring good, love, patience, and kindness.

Happy Yuletide to everyone!

WWJD?  He'd say, "Bless you"

Well, "HE" was "God", and so "he" would probably say "I bless you" to all who sneeze.

When in doubt, deflect!  It's ok... I understand.

There is no clear evidence that this person even existed and even if he did, the current evidence shows that the early Christian church misdated his birth by four to seven years. The latter is a fact. So if they got the birth year of their own creator wrong, it should reeeally make you think about what else they might have gotten wrong.

That's a decisive destinction to an established religious and historical figure like Muhammed, whose existance, birth date and life are fairly well documented with tangible evidence.

The concept of Jesus seems to be an updated rehashment of Buddha to me.

Jesus was born. That's a high probability (to my view), but not an undisputed fact. I think he existed, although the historical references to him are very sparse. There's just too much tradition and culture attached to the name, much of which occurred within 100 years of his alleged life, for me to dismiss it as fantasy.

Jesus being crucified goes to the tradition of the story. There's no non-scriptural reference that I'm aware of that he was crucified. If you're saying that "unverifiable" means "undisputed," well, that's a bit glib.

That he was crucified for our sins. That's pure religious doctrine. It's a spiritual issue. Not fact. It's not even close to a part of history, any more than the burning bush, the immaculate conception, the walking on the water, the resurrection, the ascension are parts of history.

He has certainly been an inspiring figure for many for a bit shy of 2,000 years. Muhammad, for not as long as Buddha, for longer. Abraham, for longer than that. Krishna, for still longer than that.  I don't think you'd get a Hindu, or a Buddhist, or a Muslim to say that Jesus is the most inspiring figure. Not surprisingly, though, any number of Christians would.

I don't think that any one single person like Jesus necessarily existed. The fact that he left nothing in writing is suspicious. The figure of Jesus was probably a mishmash of stories about preachers of the time with mythologies from other cultures mixed in.

He was alive for 33 years, then he died.  Then he was dead for a few days.  Then he resurrected.  He is alive ever since and forever more (according to the story).  There's no contradiction, just an extraordinary occurrence.

No one in my family is an incarnation of the Almighty, so it's not a fair comparison.

Someone who's actually into Christian apologetics really ought to jump in here.  I can take a stab at these questions but they really call for someone who can draw deeply from the centuries of theological theorizing that allow informed, intelligent people to take the central Christian myths seriously.

If Jesus existed he most likely was an unconventional Jewish preacher who pissed off the Jewish religious establishment and/or the Romans they were in bed with - and got killed for it. Maybe even crucified. That however was nothing extraordinary in those times and this "he died for our sins" fantasy of the Christians, this exaggeration of what was a common punishment back then is actually an insult to the hundreds of thousands of other victims of crucifixation.

During their own time Jesus was probably an irrelevant and unrecognized figure, much unlike, let's say Spartacus, who probably met a similar end at the cross and was a much larger man regarding his immediate influence on the ancient world. So why did most of the world forget about a man who lead a brazen rebellion against the Romans to free the slaves while a multi-trillion dollar religion business was constructed around a banal preacher, lasting almost 2.000 years of continuous expansion?

The answer lies less in what the men did themselves and more in how their disciples carried on and kept them in memory. Spartacus' followers were crucified or enslaved again, end of story. There was no growing legend surrounding the man, growing more extravagant with every generation of followers. What we know of his life thus is mostly a critical reflection of the accounts of Roman historians.

The disciples of Jesus on the other hand managed to create an appealing new religion centered around love and redemption, a stark contrast to the vulgar Roman faith as well as to the unappealing quaintness of Judaism. As their numbers grew the tales about the founder became more outrageous with every new generation, tales became myths and myths finally became legends when those that knew people who knew the actual man had died off too.

When the Roman authorities finally took notice of this growing cult threatening their interests and started to persecute the Christians it only accelerated this process of mystification. These people needed something, someone to believe in to get them through those dark times, and believing in a magical superhuman who could walk on water, turn it into wine and heal the sick with a touch of his hands was simply more comforting than believing in a man, just a man.

That's a process not exclusive to Jesus. Many figures of folk tales and legends are based on real people. Just think about King Arthur, Robin Hood or the heroes of the Illiad. What makes Jesus special is that whoever follower created his legend in the first place, managed to make it last.

You have chosen to omit the resurrection of Jesus Christ from your opening statement. From the get-go your intention is clear.
The "logic" in your actions is the intent to deceive.
That deception insists you also deny His identity and authority.
And you have remained true to your position: you are a slave to sin.
You have received not from the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ.
While mercy, grace, forgiveness and love abound, you want none of these things.
Yet you cannot shake the hold of Jesus Christ upon you - for logic would have you do other things with your life - but here you are yet again - you posess no logic or wisdom.

What He gives you do not want nor do you want anyone else to have what He gives.
You battle in vain.

Rev 1:18   I am he that liveth, and was dead; and, behold, I am alive for evermore, Amen; and have the keys of hell and of death.  - Jesus Christ

They make you folks crazier by the day, I swear it.

Svend wrote:



They make you folks crazier by the day, I swear it.

You have addressed nothing that I posted.

Svend wrote:


They make you folks crazier by the day, I swear it.

But your posting really didn't address anything, other than calling him a bad person.

There's nothing to seriously address!  I can spew out some voodoo mumbo jumbo too... would I expect you to take it seriously and "address" it? 


The answer is no, btw.

Justin wrote:

Svend wrote:


They make you folks crazier by the day, I swear it.

But your posting really didn't address anything, other than calling him a bad person.

I answered the OP.

Crap. Utter confused crap.

I shook myself free of the imprisoning grip of Jesus Christ upon my mind a long time ago and his myth is rendered helpless and impotent before me.

True logic would have me expose the myth of Jesus Christ, so that others may be freed of its corruption, and I expose his myth successfully.

Wrong on both counts. But you appear possessed by an ancient falsehood. Your eyes are blinded by that possession.

You spouted bizarre religious nonsense... that's not "answering" anything.

I answered The OP

Rev 1:18   I am he that liveth, and was dead; and, behold, I am alive for evermore, Amen; and have the keys of hell and of death.  - Jesus Christ

You are drawn to threads about Jesus Christ like a moth to the flame.
You have succeeded at nothing other than that.

And I saw an angel standing in the sun, who cried in a loud voice to all the birds flying in midair, “Come, gather together for the great supper of God, so that you may eat the flesh of kings, generals, and the mighty, of horses and their riders, and the flesh of all people, free and slave, great and small.”

Then I saw the beast and the kings of the earth and their armies gathered together to wage war against the rider on the horse and his army. But the beast was captured, and with it the false prophet who had performed the signs on its behalf. With these signs he had deluded those who had received the mark of the beast and worshiped its image. The two of them were thrown alive into the fiery lake of burning sulfur. The rest were killed with the sword coming out of the mouth of the rider on the horse, and all the birds gorged themselves on their flesh.

Revelation 19: 17- 21

Sword-mouth Jesus is coming to slaughter everyone.