(February 20, 2023 at 5:37 pm)brewer Wrote: I find this debate humorous.
I choose to look at it as a critique of Story, similar to, ‘Why didn’t the eagles just fly the Ring to Mordor?’
Boru
‘I can’t be having with this.’ - Esmeralda Weatherwax
What if Judas didn't do it?
|
(February 20, 2023 at 5:37 pm)brewer Wrote: I find this debate humorous. I choose to look at it as a critique of Story, similar to, ‘Why didn’t the eagles just fly the Ring to Mordor?’ Boru
‘I can’t be having with this.’ - Esmeralda Weatherwax
(February 20, 2023 at 6:33 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote:(February 20, 2023 at 5:37 pm)brewer Wrote: I find this debate humorous. You mean the Watsonian/Doylist paradigm I tend to look at the Bible from?
Comparing the Universal Oneness of All Life to Yo Mama since 2010.
I was born with the gift of laughter and a sense the world is mad. (February 20, 2023 at 1:04 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote:(February 19, 2023 at 6:12 pm)John 6IX Breezy Wrote: Right, they hired an informant in this situation, but notice that there was already a plot to kill Jesus. My claim is that this would have taken place by any means available, and betrayal wasn't necessary for it to occur. For the record, here's the sort of rules of evidence that the Sanhedrin would be under for capital cases:
As you can imagine, a properly sanctioned execution would be only slightly more common than hens' teeth. Vigilante stonings, maybe, but not one sanctioned by the Sanhedrin.
Comparing the Universal Oneness of All Life to Yo Mama since 2010.
I was born with the gift of laughter and a sense the world is mad. (February 20, 2023 at 9:32 pm)Rev. Rye Wrote:(February 20, 2023 at 6:33 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: I choose to look at it as a critique of Story, similar to, ‘Why didn’t the eagles just fly the Ring to Mordor?’ I've always objected to that term. 'Doylist' makes no sense, as Doyle was simply Watson's literary agent. A Watsonian interpretation is the only valid one. *surreptitiously polishes his BSI badge* Boru
‘I can’t be having with this.’ - Esmeralda Weatherwax
RE: What if Judas didn't do it?
February 22, 2023 at 11:29 am
(This post was last modified: February 22, 2023 at 11:34 am by The Grand Nudger.)
Missing the forest I think. The answer to why the eagles didn't just fly the ring to mordor will come down to plot and fiction. The reason Jew betrayed God-Is-Salvation is neither plot nor fiction. It's a literary expression of frustrated theological nationalism going all the way back to the ot. It is always and forever the reason that bad things happen to gods people, as told by gods people. Deicide is just the capstone on a monument to that effect. Race mixing, foreign gods and goods, internal squabbles, and a pronounced lack of fidelity leading to self-betrayal.
I think the super interesting bit is that this story resonated with the romanizing gentiles as much if not more. That they had come to believe themselves to be the people of the book.
I am the Infantry. I am my country’s strength in war, her deterrent in peace. I am the heart of the fight… wherever, whenever. I carry America’s faith and honor against her enemies. I am the Queen of Battle. I am what my country expects me to be, the best trained Soldier in the world. In the race for victory, I am swift, determined, and courageous, armed with a fierce will to win. Never will I fail my country’s trust. Always I fight on…through the foe, to the objective, to triumph overall. If necessary, I will fight to my death. By my steadfast courage, I have won more than 200 years of freedom. I yield not to weakness, to hunger, to cowardice, to fatigue, to superior odds, For I am mentally tough, physically strong, and morally straight. I forsake not, my country, my mission, my comrades, my sacred duty. I am relentless. I am always there, now and forever. I AM THE INFANTRY! FOLLOW ME!
You know just because we moderns cannot understand something does not mean that from an objective perspective there is not a good reason why things happened as they did. "I do not know" remains a viable answer without a being a reason for disbelief.
<insert profound quote here>
(February 16, 2023 at 10:12 pm)Fake Messiah Wrote: Judas is proverbially a bad guy of the NT, so what would have happened if he didn't betray Jesus? Would Jesus' mission be a (bigger) success or would it be a failure?I've wondered that same exact thing for many years. We supposedly have free will but certain people have to do certain things at certain times for God's plan to unfold. Now I'm sure that Christians would have some arbitrary, ad hoc rationalization to solve this blatant contradiction just like when they say that God has a morally sufficient reason to allow the evil of the world but they can't tell you what it is. They have nowhere to hide. Either they accept reason and logic or they don't. It's only by the sheer ignorance of logic on the part of the general public that they get away with this fraud. Religionists have a vested interest in the dumbing down of society. It's the only way they survive. No wonder they are afraid of their kids going to college or surfing the web. Exodus 9:12 gives us the biblical answer to your question.
"Do not lose your knowledge that man's proper estate is an upright posture, an intransigent mind, and a step that travels unlimited roads."
"The hardest thing to explain is the glaringly evident which everybody has decided not to see."
"Never trust a fox. Looks like a dog, behaves like a cat."
~ Erin Hunter (February 22, 2023 at 10:02 pm)Neo-Scholastic Wrote: You know just because we moderns cannot understand something does not mean that from an objective perspective there is not a good reason why things happened as they did. "I do not know" remains a viable answer without a being a reason for disbelief.In Christianity's premises, there is no such thing as objectivity. Christianity explicitly rejects the principle of objectivity. This is the clearest, textbook example of a stolen concept one will ever see.
"Do not lose your knowledge that man's proper estate is an upright posture, an intransigent mind, and a step that travels unlimited roads."
"The hardest thing to explain is the glaringly evident which everybody has decided not to see." (February 23, 2023 at 1:28 am)Objectivist Wrote: In Christianity's premises, there is no such thing as objectivity. Christianity explicitly rejects the principle of objectivity. This is the clearest, textbook example of a stolen concept one will ever see. I confess I'm not seeing why this is so. Google tells me the definition goes this way: Quote:(of a person or their judgement) not influenced by personal feelings or opinions in considering and representing facts. If you are critical of certain Christians, you could certainly accuse them of being insufficiently objective in their thinking -- that is, we could assert that they reach their conclusions due to personal feelings or opinions. But is it a "Christian premise" that people must reach conclusions through feelings and opinions? What explicitly about Christianity's premises doesn't allow objectivity? |
« Next Oldest | Next Newest »
|