Call for ecumenical throwdown!

[Pekka]

drosedars, are you trying to say that religions and philosophies (of life) are basically subsets of Tao?

[DRoseDARs]

You're misunderstanding what is meant by Tao. Think of "Tao" as simply a word that doesn't have an English or Finnish equivalent in translation. Tao is the presence of all things and processes. It also accounts for Nothingness. If you take an anthropology class (and maintain an open mind instead of a rigidly religious mind) you start to notice patterns in Human behaviour and tendencies. Things that seemed odd and inexplicable to you before the course start making sense by the end. By learning about the different religions we have, you start to notice patterns and shared elements that start painting a larger picture explaining Human nature. Physicists studying atomic particles are uncovering the processes of the universe, thus expanding an understanding of Tao too. Tao is not some magical force, nor is it a god. It is merely a word for that from which all things, even God, came from and to seperate all that from Nothingness.

At least that's my understanding and interpretation. Taoism is a philosophy, a way of looking at things. There is no strict interpretation if you simply read the Tao te Ching, but there are those who have made it a religion, which is fine too.

[Rufus T. Firefly]

Could you first point to the evidence that

1) Jesus claimed to be God, and/or
2) Jesus wanted us to worship him, rather than just embrace his ideals?

Frankly, if we listened to Jesus instead of worshipping Him, we'd not only be closer to other religions' ideas of Jesus, but closer to His own ideas, as well.

[Ted Striker]

Originally posted by Pekka

But my point also is, why would Jesus be the key to salvation, and the rest just gets it wrong?

This is where I have a major problem with the way almost all modern churches teach Christianity.

I like the way Rufus describes it much better, but I think most of the churches have changed the original teachings into to something completley different than was originally intended (or unintended is more accurate).

[Odin]

You're sounding like a crazy New Ager, DRoseDARs. Physics has nothing to do with oriental mysticism.

[DRoseDARs]

Originally posted by Odin
You're sounding like a crazy New Ager, DRoseDARs. Physics has nothing to do with oriental mysticism.

Taoism is not mysticism, it's a philosophy, a way of looking at things in the real world. Matters of God and such are left to the observer and out of the philosophy.

[Ben Kenobi]

Yes this would be true, but isn't it the Christians duty to show that he did rise from the dead, yes? How have we shown this?

A very good question. Through the gospels.

His body was gone, but it could have been stolen. Such important matter, I would assume that at least someone would TRY to steal it, no matter what.

Indeed, that was the assumption of the Pharisees, who went to Pilate to ask Pilate to assign guards to Christ's tomb. Pilate told them to make the tomb as secure as possible so that no one would have interfered. What we see is that the guards fled, and then told the pharisees that they had fallen asleep.

Just like bodies of important people, some have been stolen, tried to be stolen etc.. Einsteins brains were hijacked, too. Because there's lots of value in it, I'm not talking about value as in money, that if someone stole it, they were thinking we make a lot of money afterwards, they could be his followers, thinking it's too valuable to leave it there but he needs more proper place or what ever..

Think about it in this way. If you are a disciple of Christ, prior to his death, you believed that he was the Son of God, and that he would free the Jews from the rule of Rome. For him to not only be arrested, but crucified, and killed, devastated each of the disciples, as well as the shame in abandoning their master. Yet, we see, in the morning after the women go to the tomb, that the tomb was empty, and the disciples rush out to see if it is true. It doesn't make sense for the Christians to steal the body of Christ, claim that he rose from the dead, only to suffer and die for their beliefs.

[Ben Kenobi]

The Jesus thing, it seems so.. like a little nuance that you have to play or you won't win. And that, as a big picture seems so odd, kidn of 'what does it really matter' even. Is it THAT important, and if it is, then why?

We have forgotten Christ it seems, even in the Christian dominated west. Yes, he is important, but why? Because of the claims that he made of himself. He claimed to be God, in the flesh, and that those who will believe in him will be saved. We cannot save ourselves through the good works that we do, because the standard is perfection. No matter how good we are, we shall always sin and fall short. Thus, we need Christ to be saved, and this is why he is not just a 'nuance', but the core.

And what about people before Christ? They didn't know about those stories. Or did Jesus when he left go 'well the time starts... now'?

Read Romans, Paul gets into this question. God can save those whom he will save. Paul talks about how each man has his own conscience, and even lacking knowledge of Christ, will be measured according to what he knows of God through his conscience. Abraham was saved in faith to God, even though he did not know Christ, and so will those who do not know of scriptures.

[Ben Kenobi]

Could you first point to the evidence that

1) Jesus claimed to be God, and/or
2) Jesus wanted us to worship him, rather than just embrace his ideals?

Excellent questions.

To answer the first, I am going to start with the account of Moses' calling.

Exodus 3:13-4

Moses said to God, "Suppose I go to the Israelites and say to them, 'The God of your fathers has sent me to you,' and they ask me, 'What is his name?' Then what shall I tell them?"


God said to Moses, "I am who I am . This is what you are to say to the Israelites: 'I AM has sent me to you.' "

Now, going to the Gospels, we see Christ make the very same claim to the Jews.

John 8:49-58

"I am not possessed by a demon," said Jesus, "but I honor my Father and you dishonor me. I am not seeking glory for myself; but there is one who seeks it, and he is the judge. I tell you the truth, if anyone keeps my word, he will never see death."

At this the Jews exclaimed, "Now we know that you are demon-possessed! Abraham died and so did the prophets, yet you say that if anyone keeps your word, he will never taste death. Are you greater than our father Abraham? He died, and so did the prophets. Who do you think you are?"

Jesus replied, "If I glorify myself, my glory means nothing. My Father, whom you claim as your God, is the one who glorifies me. Though you do not know him, I know him. If I said I did not, I would be a liar like you, but I do know him and keep his word. Your father Abraham rejoiced at the thought of seeing my day; he saw it and was glad."

"You are not yet fifty years old," the Jews said to him, "and you have seen Abraham!"

"I tell you the truth," Jesus answered, "before Abraham was born, I am!" At this, they picked up stones to stone him, but Jesus hid himself, slipping away from the temple grounds.

This is the reply, Jesus is I AM, just as God is I Am

Unfortunately, classes, call and I will have to answer the second question later.

Frankly, if we listened to Jesus instead of worshipping Him, we'd not only be closer to other religions' ideas of Jesus, but closer to His own ideas, as well.

Ah, but that doesn't answer the question of why should we listen to Christ if he is just another man, just like anyone else. We have had many great teachers, yet if you believe that Jesus teaches the truth, moreso then anyone else, why do you believe that?

[OzzyKP]

Ben

Pekka, we can't really KNOW for a fact the status of Jesus. Going to Jewish or Muslim writings are no different or better than going to the Gospels. There isn't any objective history written on the subject because historians either didn't take notice or care about some seemingly random prophet guy, or felt threatened by him and delibrately left him out.

So we're left with the recorded experiences of those personally around him, transcribed into the Gospels. Could they be biased? Sure. That's why the church was objective enough to put in 4 versions of the same story so we could use our God-given intelligence to try and discern the real story. Can we? Probably not. But I think the Gospels are better than anything else out there, so they should start as a basis for discovery.

As for what the Gospels say about the divinity of Jesus.. I dunno. I admit I haven't read them enough to really know. Nor have I read any of the Gospels that didn't make the cut. So if there is a difference of opinion in them and we choose to believe one side and not the other... well I guess its the best we can do.

If you discount the Gospels entirely because they are religious texts and may contain bias, or discount a part of their message because they may be biased, well then you should discount ALL religious texts. Maybe the early Jews made up this whole "God" thing a thousand or two years before Jesus came along. How do we know? We don't.

So as unsatisfying an answer as it is, we really have to take it on faith and use our best judgement based on the Gospels.

[Arrian]

From Pekka's opening post:

I was wondering last night, that it struck me.. it struck me that.. what if all the other major religions are right about Jesus and we Christians got it wrong?

Bravo for at least considering that possibility (which, by extrapolation, would likely include "you're all wrong, the aetheists are right"). We should all consider that possibility about our beliefs every so often. It's healthy.

edit: as for the rest, I'll leave you to it. Though I do sometimes ponder whether perhaps I'm wrong and there is a God, I'm not in that mood today.

-Arrian

[Kontiki]

Originally posted by Ben Kenobi


A very good question. Through the gospels.

Circular.....logic......brain.....close to.......exploding.....

[Ben Kenobi]

I like the way Rufus describes it much better, but I think most of the churches have changed the original teachings into to something completley different than was originally intended (or unintended is more accurate).

How so, Ted? What would you consider the original words and how have the churches deviated from them?

[Pekka]

"Think about it in this way. If you are a disciple of Christ, prior to his death, you believed that he was the Son of God, and that he would free the Jews from the rule of Rome. For him to not only be arrested, but crucified, and killed, devastated each of the disciples, as well as the shame in abandoning their master. Yet, we see, in the morning after the women go to the tomb, that the tomb was empty, and the disciples rush out to see if it is true. It doesn't make sense for the Christians to steal the body of Christ, claim that he rose from the dead, only to suffer and die for their beliefs."

Right right.. but this is a problem to me also, because I probably WOULD try to steal the body if I was there, believing he was the son of God. Would I claim afterwards he rose from the dead, probably not. I would prolly expect there would be guards, so there's two ways. Either convince the guards that he is son of God and they should step aside, or just overwhelm them with a group. The guards would try to save their own butts for sure, being afraid what happens to them if their boss finds out they fled. Other possibility is that they were symphatetic guards, kind of believing it's possible it was the son of God and they did it willingly.

I don't see a logical error here what so ever, or that it's a slim possibility if we are talking in theoretical level. I feel this would be very possible for the sake of theoretical scenario.

"Yes, he is important, but why? Because of the claims that he made of himself. He claimed to be God, in the flesh, and that those who will believe in him will be saved. We cannot save ourselves through the good works that we do, because the standard is perfection. No matter how good we are, we shall always sin and fall short. Thus, we need Christ to be saved, and this is why he is not just a 'nuance', but the core. "

Yes, he claimed that himself. So, that's kind of like the ultimate catch. This is why it makes no sense to me, what about other people? Even though Jesus said this, many people don't know this, even today, many people don't know this. Is it their fault, their fate? Even many Christians don't know this. That the salvation happens through Jesus.

This is why it's troublesome. It's basically "because I say so". IF he is the son of God, then it's right. But if he is just a mortal man, then it's not right, and that's why the issue him being a mortal man is the most vital cornerstone. Yes, through the gospels it says he was son of God, but there were many other gospels not making that statement.

Then you say that well, you don't have to know Christ to be saved if you other ways can compensate. Well, so.. then it isn't true that the salvation happens through Jesus, it's ONE way, but not the only way, yes? But this would make more sense to me.

ozzykp, yeah but the gospels are nothing but relying on 'because I say so'. AND, yes, but other major religions are not witnesses to this. It is Christians who think Jesus is son of God, and because that is assumed true, then everything else is true also. Historians, researchers, well, it is only the Christians who claim this. Others are just bad at research? We have the BIGGEST bias to this there IS. I think it's quite obvious.

And NO it's not an answer to 'well we have to just believe'. That's the same logic as if we were to worship a bag of cabbage. Have faith. No. There needs to be more than some dude saying to me (priest etc) that this is how it is, period, take it or leave it (ps if you leave it you go to hell).

We should research this more, and not get stuck in word games and old interpretations. I'm sure everyone is researching this and always has, but it is our duty I feel like, that we get more better proof about it and not jus give up and think it's just something we have to believe. If we believe this to be true, it would be our duty to find otu the truth so others can see it too so they can be saved. There's no reason why this shouldn't be the biggest effort made by Christians. And not from a standpoint of 'supporting statements, must find them'. That's like writing new ID theory. No.. do it properly.

[Kontiki]

Pekka seeing the circular logic.