Hey creationists: 2 newly-discovered species 500 million years old

I do not know if I am correct about this - so here is my theory as far as it goes. Wil's 'religion' does make sense if he sees JC as a prophet rather than a deity. From many of his comments about not believing in a God, my impression is that Wil obviously does not subscribe to the Christian faith.

He does, however, see JC as a mortal and a prophet who had important opinions of lasting relevance to mankind. If one looks at it that way, that is the missing piece that Wil & Thomas are forever at loggerheads about. For Thomas one cannot accept Jesus unless one accepts the whole Christian package. For Wil the package is not required. The man is enough.

What say you guys?
 
Gordian Knot said:
Wil's 'religion' does make sense if he sees JC as a prophet rather than a deity.
Click to expand...
My argument rests on a prior premise: If one's going to select what bits of a text are 'authentic' and what aren't, on the basis is what suits me, then the text can say nothing more than you've already decided it can say.

It's eisegesis: Take what you want to find to the text, then find it.

Gordian Knot said:
From many of his comments about not believing in a God, my impression is that Wil obviously does not subscribe to the Christian faith.
Click to expand...
Well try telling him that :D he seems to validate his viewpoint on the basis of how dreadful all the Christians are in America.

Gordian Knot said:
He does, however, see JC as a mortal and a prophet who had important opinions of lasting relevance to mankind.
Click to expand...
But he dismisses the Bible on so many grounds ... if so much is fabrication, then the opinions and relevances are nothing more than sentimentalisms, about as authentic as ET saying 'Bo Good'.

Gordian Knot said:
If one looks at it that way, that is the missing piece that Wil & Thomas are forever at loggerheads about. For Thomas one cannot accept Jesus unless one accepts the whole Christian package. For Wil the package is not required. The man is enough.
Click to expand...
Again, on that basis ET should be the founder of a religion. But no doubt Wil will assure me it's been done ... :D
 
Who knows whether we'll clear things up or muddy the waters... (prolly end up clear to me and muddy to others).

Christian...Jesus Christ my lord and saviour? hmmm...
: one having power and authority over others:
a : a ruler by hereditary right or preeminence to whom service and obedience are due
b : one of whom a fee or estate is held in feudal tenure
c : an owner of land or other real property
d obsolete : the male head of a household
e : husband
f : one that has achieved mastery or that exercises leadership or great power in some area
2
capitalized
a : god 1
b : jesus
3
: a man of rank or high position: as
a : a feudal tenant whose right or title comes directly from the king
b : a British nobleman: as (1) : baron 2a (2) : a hereditary peer of the rank of marquess, earl, or viscount (3) : the son of a duke or a marquess or the eldest son of an earl (4) : a bishop of the Church of England
c plural capitalized : house of lords
4
—used as a British title: as
a —used as part of an official title <Lord Advocate> <Lord Mayor>
b —used informally in place of the full title for a marquess, earl, or viscount
c —used for a baron
d —used by courtesy before the name and surname of a younger son of a duke or a marquess
5
: a person chosen to preside over a festival
Click to expand...
Well I'm buying two of them.

Saviour... I do believe he has provided me with enough information to 'save' me from 'hell on earth' ie, utilizing interpretations of the stories in the bible I am comfortable with this life and death. While I've struggled with materialism, earthly pleasures, vs the monastic life... I believe I am in this plane of existence to experience it, not hide from it.

I don't believe Jesus is G!d, but developed an understanding that he is a child (an idea, a manifestation) of G!d and one with G!d, as is Thomas, Gordion, ACOT, Taijasi....etc. Whether anyone else believes that or understands it that way is upto them.

I don't see Jesus as a founder of a religion. It didn't appear he believed himself to be founder of a religion. He was expounding upon his understanding of his religion and chastised, crucified for it (blasphemy for me to indicate that I've been chastised for my beliefs as well I suppose)

Prophet?? Initially I would say no...but reading the definition, I see some that fit.
: one who utters divinely inspired revelations: as
a often capitalized : the writer of one of the prophetic books of the Bible
b capitalized : one regarded by a group of followers as the final authoritative revealer of God's will <Muhammad, the Prophet of Allah>
2
: one gifted with more than ordinary spiritual and moral insight; especially : an inspired poet
3
: one who foretells future events : predictor
4
: an effective or leading spokesman for a cause, doctrine, or group
5
Christian Science
a : a spiritual seer
b : disappearance of material sense before the conscious facts of spiritual Truth
Click to expand...
 
wil said:
What would make anyone that would be the case?

Why wouldn't someone simply think that 4,000 years ago stories were told around a fire trying to explain creation, just as 4,000 years prior to that, and today...we are still trying to understand things we don't have a handle on...

The difference between today and 4,000 years ago is today we have a better handle on things, not all nailed down, but we understand a lot more. We understand that the biblical stories were allegory, metaphor and that the earth is not the center of the universe...
Click to expand...

Wil, I can only speak for my own belief system, Judaism.

In that context, the "why" is the belief that the Torah comes directly from G-d. That doesn't mean that all of it is to be taken literally, but it's all meant to teach us something. Some of it is literal, some allegory; I'm not wise enough to know exactly which parts are literal, so I have to rely on studying the Talmud and the teachings of the sages.

I don't believe that "today we have a better handle on things." In the Jewish tradition, Moses is considered to have had the closest relationship with G-d. The prophets who succeeded Moses could communicate with G-d but with less clarity. The farther away in time you get from Moses, the less you know.
 
wil said:
Who knows whether we'll clear things up or muddy the waters... (prolly end up clear to me and muddy to others).
Click to expand...
Muddy, I'm afraid.

Really you one needs to understand the term 'Lord', or Kyrios as the koine Greek has it, in its contextual usage. As evidenced by your citation, it means different things in differing cultural contexts.

In the current context, it means 'God'.

wil said:
While I've struggled with materialism, earthly pleasures, vs the monastic life... I believe I am in this plane of existence to experience it, not hide from it.
Click to expand...
D'you think monasticism is hiding from 'life'? I think it's confronting it head on.

wil said:
I don't believe Jesus is G!d.
Click to expand...
I'm sorry, but that's rather a given in Christianity. I'll grant you in America it's different ...

wil said:
... and one with G!d ...
Click to expand...
Well then Christ was obviously barking up the wrong tree. He was rather under the impression that man was not with God. That's what seemed to exercise Him, after all. He said so, often enough.

He should be, I don't dispute. But that he is? Is this the best Love can do?

wil said:
I don't see Jesus as a founder of a religion.
Click to expand...
Even though He did so, explicitly and implicitly. Although I think you're thinking of religion in the wrong way.

wil said:
It didn't appear he believed himself to be founder of a religion.
Click to expand...
Yet He sent disciples out to preach? Told them what to do, what to say?

wil said:
He was expounding upon his understanding of his religion
Click to expand...
Well then He's founding a religion, isn't He?
He established the rites and rubrics of a Covenant in His own name. That, in any book, is the founding of a religion. It's His way to God. In fact He was a 'my way or the highway' kinda guy.

wil said:
... and (was) chastised, crucified for it
Click to expand...
For founding a religion.

Your arguing against yourself.

Scripture is their exposition of what He taught them. None of it is in His own hand.

I simply cannot see that having refuted every source as you do, at best they've allowed themselves to be carried away by their own mythologising, and at worst attempting a deception on a massive scale, but whatever, unreliable and serving some personal agenda ... that you can then pick out phrases here and there and say 'This is what He said'.

If what you say is true, none of it is reliable. None of it is worth risking your soul on. It's just the blind following the blind.

The atheist would agree with you on every point.

As for salvation, if Jesus is just a man, He can't 'save' us. All he can do is show us how to save ourselves. Which I'm sure you'll agree.

But He believed salvation was according to God.

You believe it's according to you.

I'm not decrying what you believe, I'm just wondering why you even need to designate it 'Christian', when you believe in so little and refute so much of what defines it as such.
 
I think it is quite radical for a present-day Christian to say that Jesus was not a deity. It also seems that this is the direction that a number of Christians are going in. I think people like Wil are to be commended for publically acknowledging such feelings and beliefs.

I do not think Jesus was a deity, nor do I think the original Christian church taught that he was a deity. (Jesus never said he was a deity. I feel Jesus was a very spiritually-advanced teacher at the level of, say, Buddha.) So I am thrilled to see that some Christians are moving in this direction. This is definitely a move forward.
 
Wil, you said,

"...I've been chastised for my beliefs as well I suppose."

--> Wil, you are a pioneer. All pioneers suffer in this way. We all choose our path before we are born, and you chose the difficult path. Good for you!

"... today we have a better handle on things..."

--> I agree.

Dan, you said,

"...Moses is considered to have had the closest relationship with G-d."

--> While I respect Jewish tradition, I feel there is no reason to think Moses is the last person on earth who will ever have as close a relationship with "God" as Moses did.
 
I and the Father are one.... wonder what that means....

Moses...as I see religions..lets go with Abrahamic... For some Moses is enough, we call these people Jews, they connect with G!d and all there is through the teachings and trials of Moses. For others he isn't enough, they need more detail, a further understanding, for these Jesus is enough, and we call them Christians...for others which need more, the Mohamed provided the Quran. and then the Baha'ullah, and then Joseph Smith, and Haile Salassie.... for others it is Lao Tzu, or Krishna, or the Buddha, or Confucius....

So yeah, Moses is considered to have the closest relationship to G!d, by Jews, makes perfect sense to me.
 
If you told me what your perception/understanding was, I would believe that that is what you believe. I understand the word he used most often was more akin to 'daddy' than father, the familiar rather than formal form in Aramaic?
 
wil said:
If you told me what your perception/understanding was, I would believe that that is what you believe.
Click to expand...
Well my perception is drawn from John, as I suppose yours is, but I rather think you've jumped on that line and ignored the context of the Gospel.

Jesus says 'I and the Father are one' but only to point out that such is not the case for His audience. Read the texts.

He also says:
"But if I do, though you will not believe me, believe the works: that you may know and believe that the Father is in me, and I in the Father." John 10:38 (my emphasis). You have clearly stated you don't believe 'the works'. You refute the miracles.

They – we – don't know, because we are not one in the Father as He is. We are potentially one, but not actually one. If we were, then He'd be wrong in what He's saying.

Furthermore:
He never says 'you and the Father are one.' rather He's affirming that He is, and that we are not.

Read all the text, not just bits of it. You're only getting half the story and jumping to the wrong conclusion.

This is most telling:
(Thomas and Philip are questioning His after the resurrection)
"And I will ask the Father, and he shall give you another Paraclete, that he may abide with you for ever. The spirit of truth, whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, nor knoweth him: but you shall know him; because he shall abide with you, and shall be in you. I will not leave you orphans, I will come to you. Yet a little while: and the world seeth me no more. But you see me: because I live, and you shall live. In that day you shall know, that I am in my Father, and you in me, and I in you."
John 14:16-20 – but please read the whole discourse.

Points to consider:
The world – that's us – does not know the Paraclete, the Holy Spirit. Jesus will send Him to the disciples.
(This hadn't happened yet, it occured at Pentecost.)

In the Mystery of Baptism we receive and are in (potentially) the Holy Spirit.
(t's not a given, we have to embrace it.)

By accepting the Mystery of the Eucharist we receive and are in the Son.
(Ditto.)

It's only then, in the Holy Spirit, that we can say 'Abba' – 'Dad' – to say that is a Trinitarian act, it involves you, the Holy Spirit, the Son, and the Father.

Your in Saul's boat. He didn't believe Jesus was God either. Then something happened.

The Father is in the Son and in the Holy Spirit.
He is not in us as a given. We have to accept and embrace the Holy Spirit to know the Son, and accept and embrace the Son to know the Father.

This is not to deny the Grace of god to humanity as a whole. The difference is, they are 'anonymous Christians', whereas those who take on board His message can and will come to know – gnosis – the Holy Trinity as Three and as One and as God.
 
I've traveled my road to Damascus...and we simply had different experiences...

I believe G!d, the Christ, to be in all of us.... yes it is our choice to accept that gift...but the gift is there...

Like sitting in a sunlit room...closing the curtains doesn't stop the Son from shining....just stops it from warming our room, and lighting our way...

your mileage may vary...
 
Exactly...my path is not yours...nor Paul's...

I used to have major issues with others being on their path... now I see we sometimes walk the path together...sometimes are crossing paths...sometimes are going different directions...

But it is our path

I believe there are not only many paths, but many mountains and they all can reach the peak.
 
wil said:
I believe there are not only many paths, but many mountains and they all can reach the peak.
Click to expand...
I too believe in many paths, but I accept them for what they are.

Matthew 15:14
"Let them alone: they are blind, and leaders of the blind. And if the blind lead the blind, both will fall into the pit."
 
We can sometimes be on different paths and the same path...

Acts 9:7 And the men which journeyed with him stood speechless, hearing a voice, but seeing no man.
Acts 22:9 And they that were with me saw indeed the light, and were afraid; but they heard not the voice of him that spake to me.
 
wil said:
We can sometimes be on different paths and the same path...
Click to expand...
Who told you that? ;)

wil said:
Acts 9:7 And the men which journeyed with him stood speechless, hearing a voice, but seeing no man.
Acts 22:9 And they that were with me saw indeed the light, and were afraid; but they heard not the voice of him that spake to me.
Click to expand...
Quite. You see but don't listen. No, that's unfair. You listen selectively. :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top