Jesus ransom sacrifice ! ? For a dying man Adam ? and his offspring ?

by smiddy 18 Replies latest jw experiences

  • mP
    mP

    Trans:

    Of course it is BS- but you still have to reply to the OP within the parameters that have been set... But what we need is a definition of Biblical 'perfection' and whether this equates to immortality. Obviously 'Jesus' was born, and grew older to the age of 30 or so: so when would a perfect man stop ageing? A good question... unless it is all BS of course...

    mP-> Trans:

    I see JW super long stretch thinking there. What i was attempting to show was that if one just reads the scriptures they cite, you dont even get a message close to their theology. The thinking is always the same, read lots of scriptures that say some key word in their thought and then they fill in the gaps and make it all smell right.

    Thinking #1

    Paul says Jesus saved us, so lets pretend the act of saving was his execution. Adam is also mentioned so lets focus on his sin because we know he sinned. Um yeah that makes sense, im happy with that.

    Thinking #2

    Lets see, Adam had sex with Eve and Jesus didnt. The difference between good Christ and bad Adam must be that. Or maybe its about touching Women. Jesus didnt do that either.

    #Thinking #3

    Adam had no father and Jesus has one. The message here is barstards are all bad and Paul says Jesus saved Barstards, by becoming a Big Brother.

    ...

    I suppose i could make up more ludicrous theology that would all make sense using xian logic.

  • King Solomon
    King Solomon

    Of course, it should be remembered that Paul and the rest wrote their books 600 yrs AFTER the Torah was 'finalized', and had much time to reflect upon their plots, which were consolidated over the next 400 yrs into the ultimate work of fan fiction ever compiled....

    I get a kick that these Functional Illiterati see conspiracies everywhere, but miss the most obvious and documented one staring these rabid fans in the face....

  • Leolaia
    Leolaia
    Paul thought up the idea of the 'ransom sacrifice'

    There's no such thing as a "ransom sacrifice" in the Bible. This is a conflation of separate concepts, like "paradise earth" or "great crowd of other sheep".

  • transhuman68
    transhuman68

    It's all Paul's fault for trying to use ancient Israelite concepts to kickstart his version of the Christ cult, anyway.

  • mP
    mP

    trans:

    It's all Paul's fault for trying to use ancient Israelite concepts to kickstart his version of the Christ cult, anyway.

    mP:

    The funny thing is the OT is very much a wishful history of the Jews. I cant help but wonder about the priorities of the message it contains. It seems to me that the OT is more about the jews, their problems, and hope than particularly religious. God is just a way of explaining the unexplainable. I dont think they honestly believed that God spoke to any of them literally. They had some prominent men who thought and made up stuff.

    I dont think Paul even tries to pretend he believed in Jesus the man who talked in Jerusalem and Galilee. There are actually few scriptures from Paul where he mentions anything remotely connected with Jesus the man. The best is he had a brother in the Lord called James, and theres another that mentions Cephas and someone called John. Pauls Christ is very much an imagery saviour or answer. The problem is never clearly defined by him.

  • Leolaia
    Leolaia

    1 Corinthians 15: 13 If there is no resurrection of the dead, then not even Christ has been raised. 14 And if Christ has not been raised, our preaching is useless and so is your faith. 15 More than that, we are then found to be false witnesses about God, for we have testified about God that he raised Christ from the dead. But he did not raise him if in fact the dead are not raised. 16 For if the dead are not raised, then Christ has not been raised either. 17 And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile; you are still in your sins. 18 Then those also who have fallen asleep in Christ are lost. 19 If only for this life we have hope in Christ, we are of all people most to be pitied.

    Oh Paul....You shouldn't take your imagination so seriously, dude.

  • transhuman68
    transhuman68

    From Wikipedia:

    Genesis 1 was not originally concerned with establishing God as creator of the world (that was taken as given), or with explaining just how he created it (ancient peoples were not interested in that question), nor does the Eden story ever say that the serpent in the Garden is the Devil, or that Eden is a heavenly garden where the righteous will live life eternally, or even that this is the story of the Fall of man. The process of redefinition began when the original Hebrew text was translated into Greek for Greek-speaking Jews of the last few centuries BCE. A notable example is the word adam. In the original it signified both mankind in general and the specific first man. The authors of the Greek version took anthropos for the undifferentiated adam, and transliterated the Hebrew as Adam when a single first man seemed indicated, thus transforming adam, "man", into a personal name. Unfortunately for later readers, there was no way Greek could capture the word-play that linked adam, man/mankind, with adamah, the material from which he or they were formed.

    This partly explains how Paul was able to hoodwink his 1st century readers..

  • Leolaia
    Leolaia

    transhuman....Wikipedia is wrong. Adam as a PN did not begin with the LXX. Although the first human was called ha-'adam "the human" in the Eden narrative and the Cain narrative (both J), 'adam appears anarthrously as a PN in J's genealogical fragment in Genesis 4:25, P's genealogy in Genesis 5:1, 3-5, and the Chronicler's genealogy in 1 Chronicles 1:1.

  • transhuman68
    transhuman68

    I think I should leave this thread alone...

    I'm a better skoaler than I am a scholar, lol!

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit