(October 26, 2010 at 3:24 am)Minimalist Wrote: The people who did never heard of him.

Anymore than the Byzantines ever heard of "Mohammad."

So Jesus and Muhammad are equal to fictional characters?

(October 26, 2010 at 3:43 am)Rayaan Wrote:

(October 26, 2010 at 3:24 am)Minimalist Wrote: The people who did never heard of him.

Anymore than the Byzantines ever heard of "Mohammad."

So Jesus and Muhammad are equal to fictional characters?

I'd say they could have been real up to the point that they existed. But once you start giving them all the magical powers the books do give them, then yes, they then become equal to fictional characters.

for example?...
Arnold Schwarzenegger = a guy, who is pretty darn strong I'd admit, who really exists

The Terminator, a cyborg assassin sent from the future, programmed to kill Sarah Connor = nope, just fictional

Though Arnold sometimes likes to use his lines from Terminator ("I'll be back"). And there really are Sarah Connors out there in the world, none of them have ever been chased down by cyborg assassins. Let alone one called the Terminator.
But it can get awfully confusing sometimes when fiction and reality intertwine like that.

(October 26, 2010 at 3:43 am)Rayaan Wrote:

(October 26, 2010 at 3:24 am)Minimalist Wrote: The people who did never heard of him.

Anymore than the Byzantines ever heard of "Mohammad."

So Jesus and Muhammad are equal to fictional characters?

That's my take on it.

The 'fact' is that no one wrote about them during their "lifetimes."

There is a Byzantine reference ( to a "prophet arising among the Saracens.") which is hearsay to the 3d degree and does not name him. Jesus does not even merit that much from the Romans or Jews.

Realistic: Jesus existed but had no magical powers of an kind. Was an ordinary man like any other and spouting bollocks, pulling off magic tricks and started to become a bit of a nuisance and a threat. So the Romans decided to remove this little problem through execution by crucifixion like it has with many thousands of others. This made jesus into a martyr (which wasn't the intention of the Romans) and now not only has this given birth to a new religion with it's own martyr and symbol. That little problem became a rather large one. Jesus did not sacrifice himself, he was executed for being a pest.

Realistic 2: Jesus is entirely fictional as he never existed.
---
Fantasy: Jesus was son of god, did all the things that had been claimed like turn water into wine and walked on water, and that he sacrificed himself to remove sin from all those who follow him.

(October 26, 2010 at 3:18 am)Rayaan Wrote: But did any of you live during that time?

My wife might think she has, shes a spiritiualist who believes in re-incarnation.

You guys arent the only ones with nutty ideas............sigh

Gilligan,
Yet, again your response is horribly inept. You seem unable to recognize that multitude of well-put, sane arguments around your pitiful reply of "Yeah, he suffered." without the slightest regard for Skipper's (for whom you're clearly attached yourself to namewise--and will probably try to focus on the discussion of naming instead poorly defending your religion which is crippled with illogic.) Consider his actual words, how like anyone, he would trade a few horrible days being hung for paradise. Or, consider Minimalist, who explained how the god-man who resurrects is a common trait of religion. You're like a parrot, set on repeat, depending on others to define existence for you, constantly quoting a book handed to you, and you like a sop, constantly repeating its contents as the truth. Don't just represent of viewpoint. Be a decision maker. If every other religion is wrong, propagated by those who brought them into the religion, doesn't it make you a little suspicious that yours is made up, too? Doesn't it?

(October 25, 2010 at 3:54 pm)Gilligan Wrote: Yes, Skipper.

Because He suffered horribly.

<snip>

ADD: Here is the link on the Physical Death of Jesus (Includes medical aspects of both scourging and crucifixion):

http://www.cfpeople.org/apologetics/page51a024.html

Quote:doesn't it make you a little suspicious that yours is made up, too? Doesn't it?

Nah - true believers never get it. Nice first post, Tom.

(October 27, 2010 at 11:52 am)TomNsense Wrote: If every other religion is wrong, propagated by those who brought them into the religion, doesn't it make you a little suspicious that yours is made up, too? Doesn't it?

Yes, buh, buh, buh, buh Jesus feels so goood to believe!!

Quote:If Jesus was guaranteed to live in Heaven for eternity and be the focus of billions of peoples worship and praise how is his dying on the cross a sacrifice at all?

It is questionable whether Jesus existed muchless the mythical Jesus that turns water into wine, etc.

But as to whether there is meaning in a 'sacrifice' when there is a reward afterwards, that would depend on individual perspectives.

In the first place, Jesus' death is different than other deaths.

For example, as mentioned, supposedly Jesus had foreknowledge of the future. For normal people, we expect to die and the end or if we believe in an afterlife at least we harbor doubt, seeing as none of us have ever been there.

In this sense, it would be more impressive if, say, an atheist would die for people because an atheist has no expectations of any gains at all from the action other than personal satisfaction. Death is a much less impressive feat if the one who does it knows or errs in the belief that more is to come.

Was it painful? Surely there are a lot of really unpleasant ways to die. I myself would prefer to die in the act of love with a beautiful lady, but alas not everyone can get what they want.

It would be a stretch to say that crucifixion is worse than drowning or burning.

Yet in one sense could say that it was painful. Supposedly heaven is where God is. If connection with God is what makes heaven heavenly, then disconnection from God would be what creates hell.

It is said that God cannot coexist with sin and that Jesus took upon himself the sins of the world. Therefore, would it not suggest that there was a moment when Jesus was separated from God?

Leaving aside the mind bendingness of the trinity, I liken this to the crude example of drugs. Some drugs are said to give great pleasure, but the price is ever increasing amount or risk of the painful opposite.

To be ripped asunder from the greatest pleasure possible: would that not be equal to the greatest pain?

Indeed, if Jesus was supposed to substitute the sins of the world, and if the result of sin is hell, then it might suggest that a substitute is only proper if subjected to hell.

Quote:How is it relevant to the faith and how is it seen a selfless act?

I think the main point the illustration is trying to make, nevermind how successfully, is the paradox that losing one's life can at times be the gaining of it. I interpret this to mean that a fulfilled life can be obtained by giving into the success of other people rather than only selfish pursuits.

It is seen as selfless in the sense that people readily give of their time, possessions, even life for those who are good to them or that they love. But it is less common for such to occur amongst people with no prior relationship... whether blood, or nationality, or culture, or race, or class.

Supposedly if someone believes that they themselves were the object of overwhelming favor, then perhaps that would give them the push to do the same to other people. It's a shame that human empathy is not enough for some people, though.

Quote:and as a side note how is him dying the cure for all previous and future sin?

Now this is a fascinating idea. I wonder about this one: if Jesus died, but no one knew, would it have any effect? If it would not, then perhaps it is not merely Jesus dying which is the effective agent.

Quote:I'd go through whatever pain you could think of if I was to then go on to live forever in the sky world with sky daddy and the praise and love of half the earth.

Hrm, I hear quite a lot of people would rather go through whatever pain to NOT live forever with sky daddy. But your point is taken that if the reward is high enough, the dauntingness of a payment is diminished.

I think that is the point, however. Not that Jesus's sacrifice was oh so terrible. But that there are some things worth sacrificing for. People being one.

That is a point I wish Christianity had learned.