Whoa! Good Question!

[hereticzero]

And if humans are born with original sin because of the sin of Adam and Eve, then was Jesus also born with original sin since Jesus was born a human, thus Jesus wasn't innocent at all?

Christians will go into all kinds of gyrations over this idea of Jesus sinning vs born without sin. The immaculate conception (also not a biblical doctrine) describes how Mary was born without sin so that Jesus/God could be born without sin. However, the Christian Bible does not say that Jesus was born without sin so this is a doctrine the church fish-heads came up with to try and validate Jesus as God.

 

'Butter and honey he shall eat until he knows to refuse the evil and choose the good. For before the child shall know to refuse the evil and choose the good, the land that you loathe shall be forsaken before both its kings.' (Isa 7:15-16)

 

The Christian Bible says clearly to me that Jesus was a sinner in his youth just like anyone else, otherwise one cannot learn to refuse evil and choose good unless one has done something evil in the first place. It is one more example of Christians not keeping pace with their own holy book. Jesus was a brat as a child just like anyone else's.

[chefranden]

Come on, answer the real question. I know that you are not too dense to figure it out.

 

What was so all fired sacrificey about getting the shit kicked out of him and getting tortured to death and then spending a few hours in hell?

 

Hi Chef.

 

Seriously. Come on? The question is senseless. This Jesus was suppose to be the Jews Messiah. Some of which believed He was; followed Him, witnessed His miracles which He gave glory to their God, spoke of things outside the here and now, and then these same followers witnessed Him be executed Roman style, by their own suppose to be religious leaders, or priests.

 

Then they witnessed Him resurrect and speak to them. Jesus, according to John, in Revelations, says He has the keys to death and hell. Hence, He was something eternal from God. I simply pointed out that Jesus never said, Hey you, your going to eternal torment; as the Op states the man is enduring this very moment.

 

Even assuming the man went to hell. We are not God nor Jesus, so we as humans couldn't say where anyone is destined to say for all eternity. Maybe he's there, maybe he's not. Dunno.

 

To answer your question. Jesus was born of a virgin birth. Wouldn't that make Him God's only begotten Son?, assuming God isn't lying and He has other illegitimate children out there. If the God of Israel truly did send Jesus to be born in Mary, God claimed He was His only begotten child, then the God of Israel's child was executed by God's supposed people. That would be pretty profound in the community of Jews that accept it.

 

Sorry I was assuming that you were a believing Christian like I used to be. Silly me. Back in the day I would have had to ask the elders to excommunicate you so that you couldn't drag the congregation to hell after you. But now that I don't believe, you are fine, and you won't be going to hell, since there isn't one -- after this life anyway.

[hereticzero]

...

He went on His vacation to death, hades, hell, the pit etc; He took the keys to this place. Nobody knows if this other man is still being eternally tortured, for over 2000 years.

...

Some vacation!

[Ouroboros]

Seriously. Come on? The question is senseless. This Jesus was suppose to be the Jews Messiah. Some of which believed He was; followed Him, witnessed His miracles which He gave glory to their God, spoke of things outside the here and now, and then these same followers witnessed Him be executed Roman style, by their own suppose to be religious leaders, or priests.

Or... Jesus was a regular guy, said some cool stuff, maybe managed to pull of a few tricks, and his followers regarded him as a sage and avatar. After he died, they decided to carry on his teachings and in that sense "keep him alive." And the story over a few generations got expanded to make it sound like he did amazing and supernatural miracles and that he was bodily resurrected. It is just as plausible. But which one fits better with our experience of the world?

 

Then they witnessed Him resurrect and speak to them. Jesus, according to John, in Revelations, says He has the keys to death and hell. Hence, He was something eternal from God. I simply pointed out that Jesus never said, Hey you, your going to eternal torment; as the Op states the man is enduring this very moment.

Those who supposedly saw him resurrected did only a fraction of what Paul did--he who didn't see Jesus bodily resurrected but only in a vision. So if someone who have a bad trip from some mushrooms have more energy and conviction than those who supposedly literally saw the real thing... it makes you wonder the truth about the stories. Who would be more eager to believe and push for the gospel? Those who saw dead men walking in the streets of Jerusalem, and lived with supernatural miracles for three years, or the guy who fell of his horse and hit his head, and then studied the "books" alone for three years?

 

Even assuming the man went to hell. We are not God nor Jesus, so we as humans couldn't say where anyone is destined to say for all eternity. Maybe he's there, maybe he's not. Dunno.

I think the point is, Jesus didn't suffer as much as that guy. Why putting the suffering of Jesus up on a pedestal, like it was something heroic about his death, when the other guy suffered just as much, or actually more since he took longer to die, and stayed longer in Hell.

 

To answer your question. Jesus was born of a virgin birth. Wouldn't that make Him God's only begotten Son?, assuming God isn't lying and He has other illegitimate children out there. If the God of Israel truly did send Jesus to be born in Mary, God claimed He was His only begotten child, then the God of Israel's child was executed by God's supposed people. That would be pretty profound in the community of Jews that accept it.

If Jesus wasn't fully human, and that made him sin-free, then he wasn't worthy to be the "price" to pay for our redemption. But if he was fully human, then he must have had the inherited sin. The Catholic Church explains it with: "it's a mystery, we have no frigging clue, but just accept it as one of God's amazing mysteries."

 

Besides, it was against the belief of the Jews to regard a human as God. It was heresy, so I don't believe they were suddenly fascinated by a man being God.

 

The Mary/Jesus story is more likely that Mary had a little affair on the side, got pregnant before she was married, and to not shame herself or her family, she claimed it was from God. Simple excuse from a scared little slutty teenager. It's amazing that people still are falling for it...

[Abiyoyo]

Sorry I was assuming that you were a believing Christian like I used to be. Silly me. Back in the day I would have had to ask the elders to excommunicate you so that you couldn't drag the congregation to hell after you. But now that I don't believe, you are fine, and you won't be going to hell, since there isn't one -- after this life anyway.

 

Why is that? I never said there wasn't a hell. I just think it's at the end of life as it says in the book.

[Abiyoyo]

 

Or... Jesus was a regular guy, said some cool stuff, maybe managed to pull of a few tricks, and his followers regarded him as a sage and avatar. After he died, they decided to carry on his teachings and in that sense "keep him alive." And the story over a few generations got expanded to make it sound like he did amazing and supernatural miracles and that he was bodily resurrected. It is just as plausible. But which one fits better with our experience of the world?

 

Plausible to some. Which world? America? or the Vatican? or Gaza? Iraq? The experiences of the world throughout history has been pushed to war, power, wealth. The religion of Christianity has been right in the middle.

 

 

Those who supposedly saw him resurrected did only a fraction of what Paul did--he who didn't see Jesus bodily resurrected but only in a vision. So if someone who have a bad trip from some mushrooms have more energy and conviction than those who supposedly literally saw the real thing... it makes you wonder the truth about the stories. Who would be more eager to believe and push for the gospel? Those who saw dead men walking in the streets of Jerusalem, and lived with supernatural miracles for three years, or the guy who fell of his horse and hit his head, and then studied the "books" alone for three years?

 

Gotta love ole Paul

 

I think the point is, Jesus didn't suffer as much as that guy. Why putting the suffering of Jesus up on a pedestal, like it was something heroic about his death, when the other guy suffered just as much, or actually more since he took longer to die, and stayed longer in Hell.

 

Hans, I think it's been on a pedestal because those that accept it believe whether He was sinless or just a great man of God; he was killed as a prophet, Messiah, Anointed One etc. to the Jews, later to those that accept it.

 

 

If Jesus wasn't fully human, and that made him sin-free, then he wasn't worthy to be the "price" to pay for our redemption. But if he was fully human, then he must have had the inherited sin. The Catholic Church explains it with: "it's a mystery, we have no frigging clue, but just accept it as one of God's amazing mysteries." Besides, it was against the belief of the Jews to regard a human as God. It was heresy, so I don't believe they were suddenly fascinated by a man being God.

 

Sin-free by the Law, or by God? Some Muslim still believe it is heresy.

[Robbobrob]

It does fascinate me that Christians dare to assert that Jesus even came close to fulfilling the requirements to be the Jewish Messiah. The level of self-deciet involved there is amazing.

 

Can't be the messiah without doing some stuff the first time around.....build a Temple(Ezekiel 37:26-28), recall all Jews from Disporia (Isaiah 43:5-6), usher in world peace (Isaiah 2:4) , unite humanity as one(Zechariah 14:9).

 

Can't be the messiah without leading the Jewish people to full Torah observance. The Torah states that all mitzvot (commandments, all 613 of them, not just the Top Ten list) remain binding forever, and anyone coming to change the Torah is immediately identified as a false prophet. (Deut. 13:1-4) Throughout the New Testament, Jesus contradicts the Torah and states that its commandments are no longer applicable. (see John 1:45 and 9:16, Acts 3:22 and 7:37) For example, John 9:14 records that Jesus made a paste in violation of Shabbat, which caused the Pharisees to say (verse 16), "He does not observe Shabbat!"

 

 

These are a small sampling....if I am going to side with anyone on the messiah thing, it would be with the original writers and followers of the prophecies and requirements, and not the gnetle Catholic/Protestent interpretations that came centuries later, based on books (the Gospels and the letters) written by no one who saw Jesus's ministry or dead first hand.

[mwc]

The ram was all gone.

According to the human texts this is true. According to the "Book of the Ram," it is written that he returned to life to save those rams that believe in him. Many believe the ram cult started as a response to the humans persecuting the rams in the name of their own false gods. Later, out of necessity, the rams expanded the religion to be more inclusive of ewes and other persecuted animals.

 

mwc

[Neon Genesis]

Luke. It mentions nothing of eternal torture. As far as the gulf that is fixed between them; it speaks in the past, or then present. It says they have Moses and the prophets. Jesus didn't say they had Moses, the prophets, and Himself. He said they had Moses and the prophets, which I would assume means that this depiction was before Christ died and got His keys to hell. Jesus is the one who told the story.Following me?

Where in the bible does it say Jesus went to hell and got the keys to hell? That isn't anywhere in the canon at all. If you're going to cherry pick from non-canon gospels, then why not just ditch the belief in hell all-together and make the leap to liberal Christianity? And if hell isn't eternal, then how do you explain Mark 3:28-30?

“Assuredly, I say to you, all sins will be forgiven the sons of men, and whatever blasphemies they may utter; 29 but he who blasphemes against the Holy Spirit never has forgiveness, but is subject to eternal condemnation”— 30 because they said, “He has an unclean spirit.”

 

 

 

Mark. Jesus said that after He was dead and resurrected; that wouldn't apply to the other man as mentioned earlier.

 

English

You're forgetting one of the most popular bible verses. John 3:16-21 says that anyone who doesn't believe in Jesus is already condemned and will go to hell

For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life. 17 For God did not send His Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world through Him might be saved.

18 “He who believes in Him is not condemned; but he who does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. 19 And this is the condemnation, that the light has come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. 20 For everyone practicing evil hates the light and does not come to the light, lest his deeds should be exposed. 21 But he who does the truth comes to the light, that his deeds may be clearly seen, that they have been done in God.

This commandment was given before the crucifixion of Jesus, so it still applies to the other man on the cross.

[Ouroboros]

Plausible to some. Which world? America? or the Vatican? or Gaza? Iraq? The experiences of the world throughout history has been pushed to war, power, wealth. The religion of Christianity has been right in the middle.

Plausible to me. Jesus as a historical, cool guy, with a lot of opinions, later made into a legend by Hellenistic Jews who needed a new Hero to look up to.

 

Gotta love ole Paul

The worlds first cult leader.

 

Hans, I think it's been on a pedestal because those that accept it believe whether He was sinless or just a great man of God; he was killed as a prophet, Messiah, Anointed One etc. to the Jews, later to those that accept it.

Socrates also was tried and executed because his message. He died for his cause and beliefs. Glory be to Socrates.

 

Sin-free by the Law, or by God? Some Muslim still believe it is heresy.

Law doesn't define sin. Sin is a religious concept and defined in the eye of theology. Theology, religious dogma, and religious belief should NOT be law. We tried it, and it failed.

 

So are Muslims right or wrong? And by whose definition, and why? It's all a matter of belief.

 

And why have a belief in a story about how to be saved from something in an afterlife we don't even know about?

[mwc]

Want to try for Jesus never sinned? Disobeyed his mom at some point. You really want to say a kid going off to speak in a temple when everyone is getting ready to leave and walking some ways outside the city can do that without disobeying mom and adoptive dad? Kids back then old enough to walk were given tasks of some kind...even a basic "Watch the donkey while we pack."

Xians never take the easy out with this. I guess it makes "jesus" too "Jew-y." I can't find tons of support for the whole thing but it does appear that it was similar to today. That being that at age 12 "jesus" wouldn't have had a "bar mitzah" and would not have been under the law (by definition). So he could not have "sinned" by disobeying, or dishonoring, his parents. But, as I said, this would make his very "Jew-y" and not desirable to most xians. It also means that there's a need to account for these Jewish rules (no accountability until placed under the Law) and the new xian rules that screw you from birth (which are supposed to be more fair).

 

Of course this doesn't even address the whole "Mary taking note of it" garbage since she knows/says nothing to anyone at any point later on in the story so it's obviously just put in there for the same reason other 12 year old prodigies existed in other works of the day.

 

But there you go xians. Feel free to take your "out."

 

mwc

[chefranden]

Sorry I was assuming that you were a believing Christian like I used to be. Silly me. Back in the day I would have had to ask the elders to excommunicate you so that you couldn't drag the congregation to hell after you. But now that I don't believe, you are fine, and you won't be going to hell, since there isn't one -- after this life anyway.

 

Why is that? I never said there wasn't a hell. I just think it's at the end of life as it says in the book.

 

Well you are being very confusing.

 

Is this true:

 

I believe in God, the Father Almighty,

the Maker of heaven and earth,

and in Jesus Christ, His only Son, our Lord:

 

Who was conceived by the Holy Ghost,

born of the virgin Mary,

suffered under Pontius Pilate,

was crucified, dead, and buried;

 

He descended into hell.

The third day He arose again from the dead;

 

He ascended into heaven,

and sitteth on the right hand of God the Father Almighty;

from thence he shall come to judge the quick and the dead.

 

I believe in the Holy Ghost;

the holy catholic church;

the communion of saints;

the forgiveness of sins;

the resurrection of the body;

and the life everlasting.

 

 

Is this true:

I believe in one God, the Father Almighty, Maker of heaven and earth, and of all things visible and invisible.

 

And in one Lord Jesus Christ, the only-begotten Son of God, begotten of the Father before all worlds; God of God, Light of Light, very God of very God; begotten, not made, being of one substance with the Father, by whom all things were made.

 

Who, for us men and for our salvation, came down from heaven, and was incarnate by the Holy Spirit of the virgin Mary, and was made man; and was crucified also for us under Pontius Pilate; He suffered and was buried; and the third day He rose again, according to the Scriptures; and ascended into heaven, and sits on the right hand of the Father; and He shall come again, with glory, to judge the quick and the dead; whose kingdom shall have no end.

 

And I believe in the Holy Ghost, the Lord and Giver of Life; who proceeds from the Father and the Son; who with the Father and the Son together is worshipped and glorified; who spoke by the prophets.

 

And I believe one holy catholic and apostolic Church. I acknowledge one baptism for the remission of sins; and I look for the resurrection of the dead, and the life of the world to come. Amen.

 

Is This True:

 

Link, too long to paste

 

 

Is this True:

Link, too long to paste

 

Is this True:

Link, too long to paste

 

What of this is true:

 

1 Creation: God created the universe and the first couple, Adam and Eve. Liberal Christians tend to interpret the beginnings of the Book of Genesis as mythical truth rather than a precise description of real events.

2 The Fall of humanity: Adam and Eve were seduced by Satan into disobeying God's instructions and eating forbidden fruit. That act brought sin into the world, which has been inherited by all of humanity. Again, liberals generally regard this story as mythical and disagree with the concept of "original sin". Some believe that the story in Genesis actually records the rise of humanity, not its fall.

3 Ancient Israelites: The ancient Israelites were God's chosen people, to whom he gave a complete set of laws to govern their behavior until the arrival of Jesus. Christians have various conflicting beliefs about the status of God's covenants with the Jewish people today. Some feel that Jews and Christians have separate paths to salvation. Others believe in supercessionism: that when Jews rejected Jesus as the Messiah and the Son of God, they lost their special status; God's promises were then transferred to the Christian church who became the new chosen people.

4 Salvation: Almost all Christians agree that everyone has eternal life. However, Christianity had traditionally taught that the destiny of most people is to go to Hell for endless torture because of their sins, without any hope of mercy or an end to their suffering. Only that very small minority who have achieved salvation before death will live forever in heaven. Whether one has been saved is thus a topic of great importance - more important to a conservative Christian than any other factor in life.

5 Salvation of Christians: The Christian Church has taught that salvation involves the forgiveness by God of a person's sins. The person repents for her/his sins, trusts Jesus as Lord and Savior, and becomes reconciled with God. God makes the person into a "new creation." These traditional beliefs are held by most conservative Christians today.

 

More liberal Christians place little emphasis on salvation; they often reject the concept of Hell as a physical location and interpret it metaphorically - perhaps as a state of mind, or as a place where one is separated from God, or as a state experienced on Earth. The idea of a loving God sending people to be eternally tortured is abhorrent to many of them.

 

Denominations differ over criteria by which a person is saved: some believe that faith alone is sufficient; others believe that good works are sufficient; some believe that both are necessary.

1

Salvation of non-Christians:

No consensus exists over the fate after death of three groups of people:

a People in non-Christian countries who have never heard the Christian message and therefore have never been able to either accept or reject it.

b Adults who have heard the Gospel message but have rejected it for whatever reason.

c Infants, small children and developmentally delayed individuals who cannot understand the Gospel or make a rational decision to accept or reject it.

2

The Bible:

Conservative Christians generally believe that the original writings of the Bible, were inerrant (without error). God inspired its authors. Liberals tend to view the Bible as a collection of writings describing a gradual evolution of religious thought. They see material in the Bible that reflects the pre-scientific knowledge of its authors: the Earth as the center of the universe, a solid firmament in the sky that separates heaven from the earth, mental illness caused by demonic possession, a talking snake and donkey, etc. They see laws derived from the tribal culture of the Bible's authors which are considered profoundly immoral today. They see other text that was incorporated from nearby Pagan cultures.

3

Jesus' Birth:

The Christian Church has traditionally taught that Mary, the mother of Jesus, was a virgin at the time of Jesus' conception. Roman Catholics believe that she remained a virgin all her life. Most liberals regard this as a myth, based upon an ancient mistranslation of the Book of Isaiah, and on the life stories of many god-men saviors from Pagan religions.

4

Atonement

: This is the concept that, through Jesus' life -- and particularly his death -- the relationship between God and Man (which had been damaged by Adam and Eve's sin) can now be restored through the process of salvation. Different denominations have explained how the atonement works in different ways.

5

Resurrection:

This is the teaching that after Jesus' death and burial, he arose again on the third day.

6

Ascension:

Luke's gospel describes how Jesus bodily ascended from Bethany, into the clouds towards heaven on a Monday circa 30 CE, three days after his execution. Acts, which was also written by Luke, describes Jesus ascension, but places it on the Mount of Olives about 42 days after his execution. This is a curious discrepancy, since both books were written by the same author.

7

Second coming:

Many Christians have expected Christ's imminent return to earth ever since the 1st century CE. About one in four American adults expects him to return during their own lifetime. A substantial number expected the second coming during the year 2000. More details.

8

Incarnation:

Christians believe that God appeared on earth in human form as Jesus.

9

Justification:

An act of God in which any person who accepts that they have sinned and who believes in the atonement of Christ is forgiven of their sins and brought into a close relationship with God .

10

Rapture:

This involves the resurrection of all saved Christians who have died in the past. Both they and currently living, saved Christians will rise towards Jesus Christ in the sky. This is a relatively new belief within Christianity and is almost solely believed by conservative Protestants. It is rejected as myth by liberal Christians.

11

Regeneration of the spirit:

The belief that a new believer undergoes a spiritual rebirth.

12

Inspiration:

The belief that the authors of the Bible were inspired by the Holy Spirit so that their writings were free of error.

13

Deity:

God is a single deity who exists as a Trinity of three separate persons: the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit

a. Satan is regarded by conservatives as a created being, who was once an angel but is now an all-evil tormentor of humanity. Liberals generally regard Satan as a symbol of evil with no existence as a living entity.

14

Heaven and Hell:

Conservative Christians believe that these are locations which are places of reward and punishment. Liberal beliefs are varied.

 

Or are you just making it up as you go?

[mwc]

explain Mark 3:28-30?

“Assuredly, I say to you, all sins will be forgiven the sons of men, and whatever blasphemies they may utter; 29 but he who blasphemes against the Holy Spirit never has forgiveness, but is subject to eternal condemnation”— 30 because they said, “He has an unclean spirit.”

Before he answers I thought I'd jump in to address this. The word used for "eternal" is "aiōniou" which comes from the word we know for "eon" or "age." So lots of people will then say something like "See? It's not 'eternal' but rather for an 'age' or a set length of time." The problem is this word is derived from the other word. It's not the same. Let me quote from a Greek word study on the word in question:

[Of the examples of αἰώνιος from Philo (with whom it is less common than ἀΐδιος, q. v., of which there are some fifty instances) the following are noteworthy: de mut. nom. § 2; de caritate § 17; κόλασις αἰ. frag. in Mang. ii. 667 fin. (Eichter vi. 229 mid.); cf. de praem. et poen. § 12. Other exx. are de alleg. leg. iii. § 70; de poster. Caini § 35; quod deus immut. § 30; quis rer. div. her. § 58; de congressu quaer. erud. § 19; de prof. § 38; de somn. ii. § 43; de Josepho § 24; quod omn. prob. lib. § 4, § 18; de ebrietate § 32; de Abrah. § 10; ζωὴ αἰ.: de prof. § 15; θεὸς (ὁ) αἰ: de plantat. § 2, § 18 (bis), § 20 (bis); de mundo § 2. From Josephus: antt. 7, 14, 5; 12, 7, 3; 15, 10, 5; b. j. 1, 33, 2; 6, 2, 1; κλέος αἰ.: antt. 4, 6, 5; b. j. 3, 8, 5 μνήμη αἰ.: antt. 1, 13, 4; 6, 14, 4; 10, 11, 7; 15, 11, 1; οἶκον μὲν αἰώνιον ἔχεις (of God), antt. 8, 4, 2; ἐφυλάχθη ὁ Ἰωάννης δεσμοῖς αἰωνίοις, b. j. 6, 9, 4. Sυn. ἀΐδιος, αἰώνιος: ἀΐδ. covers the complete philosophic idea — without beginning and without end; also either without beginning or without end; as respects the past, it is applied to what has existed time out of mind, αἰώνιος (fr. Plato on) gives prominence to the immeasurableness of eternity (while such words as συνεχής continuous, unintermitted, διατελής perpetual, lasting to the end, are not so applicable to an abstract term, like αἰών)

I realize that it's a little hard to read but it mentions the word from Philo and Josephus (and others) to gather it's meaning. Then in the part I highlighted it notes essentially states that "eternal" is a better meaning for this word than (in italics) something that lasts to an end. So though it derives from "age" (which implies lasting to an end in my mind) this word is different and the various authors used it in the same sense that we would use "eternal."

 

Unfortunately, having made the case for "eternal," the next word in your Mark 3 quote "condemnation" (or sometimes "damnation") is "hamartēmatos" which is always translated as "sin" in every other case (from what I can find). So this should really be "eternal sin."

 

mwc

[Abiyoyo]

Sorry I was assuming that you were a believing Christian like I used to be. Silly me. Back in the day I would have had to ask the elders to excommunicate you so that you couldn't drag the congregation to hell after you. But now that I don't believe, you are fine, and you won't be going to hell, since there isn't one -- after this life anyway.

 

Why is that? I never said there wasn't a hell. I just think it's at the end of life as it says in the book.

 

Well you are being very confusing.....

 

 

......Or are you just making it up as you go?

 

Now I'm very confused Chef

[Abiyoyo]

Where in the bible does it say Jesus went to hell and got the keys to hell? That isn't anywhere in the canon at all. If you're going to cherry pick from non-canon gospels, then why not just ditch the belief in hell all-together and make the leap to liberal Christianity? And if hell isn't eternal, then how do you explain Mark 3:28-30?

“Assuredly, I say to you, all sins will be forgiven the sons of men, and whatever blasphemies they may utter; 29 but he who blasphemes against the Holy Spirit never has forgiveness, but is subject to eternal condemnation”— 30 because they said, “He has an unclean spirit.”

 

 

Rev 1:18

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.

(KJV)

 

Hell is eternal, I am saying we don't go anywhere until the day of judgment.

[rabbi tt]

And in Mark 16:16, Jesus says that everyone who doesn't believe and isn't baptized will go to hell. The other man on the cross didn't believe and wasn't baptized, so according to biblical doctrine, he's in hell.

 

Wait a minute... you can't words to a quote and then say it means what you added... there is no "hell" in that verse... only "condemned".

 

"he who hath believed, and hath been baptized, shall be saved; and he who hath not believed, shall be condemned. "

[mwc]

Rev 1:18

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.

(KJV)

 

Hell is eternal, I am saying we don't go anywhere until the day of judgment.

Sadly, this isn't "jesus." Additionally, this "son of man" appears in a vision and the "stars" and "lamps" are revealed to be symbolic so why would I assume that the "son of man," the "keys" or anything else here isn't also symbolic and simply not explained (or redacted at some point)?

 

And the use of "forevermore" here, to compare/contrast it with what I wrote before about "eternal," is essentially an "age of ages." This is where a lot of people try to slip in that this isn't for all eternity but rather a fixed length of some sort. It's kind of like "king of kings" they didn't have a word for that either. So is this really "forevermore?" Some believed that there was an end "age" that could occur. An "ultimate" age as it were. Maybe this is a reference to that? It kind of implies eternal but it's an age that never ended nor repeated like those that came before (it's a function of the age and not a function of the "son of man"...so he's alive forevermore because the age never ends and not because he has some special power to overcome death).

 

mwc

[rabbi tt]

Hell is eternal, I am saying we don't go anywhere until the day of judgment.

 

I don't think so.

[Neon Genesis]

Hell is eternal, I am saying we don't go anywhere until the day of judgment.

Now you're completely losing me. What does this have anything to do with the thread then?

 

Wait a minute... you can't words to a quote and then say it means what you added... there is no "hell" in that verse... only "condemned".

 

"he who hath believed, and hath been baptized, shall be saved; and he who hath not believed, shall be condemned. "

ButThe bible says to be saved you have to believe and be baptized. If you don't believe and aren't baptized for your sins, then you aren't saved. And if you aren't saved, where else do you go but hell? This is what I was always taught was the literal meaning of the verse when I was a Christian as I was taught that I had to be baptized (fully submerged in water too) to be saved.

[Abiyoyo]

Hell is eternal, I am saying we don't go anywhere until the day of judgment.

 

Now you're completely losing me. What does this have anything to do with the thread then?

 

The man in the OP, the question I don't believe he is suffering in Hell for the last 2000years. The difference is that Jesus was symbolic to His Jewish followers; and the other man, I assume, just committed a usual crime that would entail execution.

 

[rabbi tt]

[quote name='Neon Genesis' date='Feb 13 2009, 08:08 PM' ButThe bible says to be saved you have to believe and be baptized. If you don't believe and aren't baptized for your sins, then you aren't saved. And if you aren't saved, where else do you go but hell? This is what I was always taught was the literal meaning of the verse when I was a Christian as I was taught that I had to be baptized (fully submerged in water too) to be saved.

 

Saved from what for what? Does the bible answer that? Does that verse, chapter or book answer that? Maybe being saved has nothing to do with what happens after you die?

[Snafutopia]

Jesus as a historical, cool guy,

 

Hi. Am curious as to why it seems a lot of ex-c's say complimentary things about Jesus. Seriously, I'm trying to understand, and I can't. If he actually said all the things he's alleged (in the Bible) to have said, it truly seems to me that he was a self-deluded egomaniac with a bad case of messiah-itis.

 

I just don't get it.

[Snafutopia]

It does fascinate me that Christians dare to assert that Jesus even came close to fulfilling the requirements to be the Jewish Messiah.

 

 

http://www.ex-christian.net/index.php?show...=28760&st=0

 

(re other OT passages proving that Jesus can't possibly have been the messiah)

 

I would really appreciate hearing from ex-fundies about this (re the Moabites / Ammonites thing). Thanks!

[Ouroboros]

Hi. Am curious as to why it seems a lot of ex-c's say complimentary things about Jesus. Seriously, I'm trying to understand, and I can't. If he actually said all the things he's alleged (in the Bible) to have said, it truly seems to me that he was a self-deluded egomaniac with a bad case of messiah-itis.

 

I just don't get it.

First, I'm not sure what you mean with "a lot of ex-c's?" Most of the time I hear people complaining that we are all and only venom spewing anti-Christians who hates everything and deny everything. So it's interesting to hear that "a lot" of us now suddenly are the opposite.

 

Secondly, read what I said in the context of the answer, that it is plausible (a theoretical possibility) to a historical Jesus, mean a person, a human, a guy (or a gal who was into cross dressing), but just that, a human, not god, not miracle man, not supernatural.

 

And thirdly, think of the story book about Jesus being inflated with stuff he didn't say, didn't do, places he didn't go, and whose name maybe even was not Jesus. So think of a regular Joe, who one day studied Buddha about how you should lay down yourself, and be more considerate about others, and Tom hears this, thinks is cool, and tell someone else. Joe goes on a tour, and things get out of hand, and eventually, years later, there a whole cult around him and people have stories about him that never happened, and some are writing books about things he never said. But now they call him The Holy Joe Blow.

 

So, can I believe in Joe, the regular guy, as a real person who really existed, but yet deny Joe Blow who is invented? Or are you forced to deny even the existence of Joe the regular guy, just because you know Holy Joe Blow is just made up? I think, since this is a possible situation, that Joe was a regular guy, but Joe Blow is people's myth about him, that I can safely accept the possibility that regular Joe existed, without at the same time mean to admire and exalt Joe Blow.

 

Now, I'm a convinced that a historical Jesus did exist? Nope. Do I think the Bible/Gospel Jesus with all the stories and miracles are made up, and fictional, and just added junk to impress the reader? I sure do. Do I think Jesus was some kind of messenger from God and called the Messiah? Nope. Do I hate a book so much that I have to come up with as much vile, anger, and nasty ideas about this fictional guy as possible, or otherwise I will risk that people will think I somehow love that character in a book and become some cultist fundamentalist? Nope. I don't think the world should be viewed as black-and-white as that. It's more gray, and one has to recognize there are shades in between the extremes.

 

To be an ex-Christian is not the same as hating a fictional character in an imaginary book. To be ex-Christian, at is core, is to deny Christianity having any claim of salvation, eternal life, Jesus as God, Jesus as savior, Jesus as zombie, and so on. But it doesn't mean, hating Christians, hating Jews, hating a fiction book, and trying to find the worst expletives to express it. On the other hand, it is okay to have those feeling, express them, and share them, but just be careful not to think that other people must be just like you.

 

You see, I've gone through the phase of anger over my past, but I'm coming to terms with it, and emotionally becoming very--should I say--stable. I used to have a very short temper and get angry for small things. But as time has gone on, and having friends who are atheists, Christians, Jews, Catholics, Buddhists, Muslims, ... I'm more accepting of people and their weird beliefs. Things can be accepted as they are, and things can be accepted to be a certain way, without accepting the beliefs. It is possible one thing is true, while a majority of other things can be proven wrong. But it doesn't have to be a requirement of full approval and mutual agreement to everything to create friendships or understanding.

[mwc]

Hi. Am curious as to why it seems a lot of ex-c's say complimentary things about Jesus.

Won't find that here. I no longer believe in a human jesus.

 

mwc