If Jesus was the" Greatest Teacher" the" Son of God" then why ?........... (page 6)

sabastious

Writing exists. "Glory" is a curtain for nothing.

That's not an argument because you can't prove God doesn't exist. My point is that compared to God writing is merely a technology. Just like MP3 players.

So.... If we were all the same instead of unique individuals, unable to express our unique opinions, we'd be better off! Kill the infadels!

When writing became commonplace a great evil was brought into reality. Jesus used the argument "for it is written" because what was written down was made official. Think of a "no diving sign" at a pool. If someone is diving into the pool anyone can simply use the sign as the authority and compel the infractor to change their course of action. Without the sign there is no authority and nothing can be done. Without writing no one can appeal to it you see. However, this brings up the problem of false witnesses and lying in general. With every technology, including writing, there is a darkside. Think about an official document that is false! Think about the chaos that comes from that. Technology is a necessary evil including writing.

-Sab

tec

He did and does a lot more than that. He writes on human hearts.

Well said.

You too, Sab. Language (words, inept translations and mistranslations between languages, etc) is imperfect.

The Spirit writing on the heart is far more effective. Because it is within, and it becomes part of us, and we act upon what comes from within. We might not always recognize the Spirit though... yet... but once we do, the spirit speaking to the spirit does not hold the same problems as the written/spoken language. Longer learning because we are so dependent upon what is seen... but best in the end.

Peace,

tammy

HintOfLime

That's not an argument because you can't prove God doesn't exist.

I don't even get the argument you propose here - So.. if I can't prove god doesn't exist... that somehow equates to writing being evil and less important than the theoretical "glory" god. Wait.. what?

If I can't prove Muhammad isn't the great holy prophet, does that mean mathmatics are evil?

I need a chart. (Oh shit.. maybe the evilness of charts are determined by the existance or non-existance of the god Shiva!)

I can prove that writing does exist - you're reading my writings right now - which is more than you can prove about your "glorious god" and all his maybe/maybe-not benefits to measuring glory on the unified scale of glory.

If you believe that only one god exists, and that all the thousands of other gods don't exist, then you are already 99.9% athiest. You just haven't gotten over that last 0.1% yet.

- Lime

sabastious

I don't even get the argument you propose here - So.. if I can't prove god doesn't exist... that somehow equates to writing being evil and less important than the theoretical "glory" god. Wait.. what?

It's really hard to put one's self in God's shoes. This is a matter of jealousy. God wants the glory because it's rightfully His. If you created the game, you will be unwilling to lose control of it. That would be like a human losing control of a machine they created to the point that it goes rogue (like if your internet browser suddenly turned against you!). In science fiction this a thrilling prospect, but it's in no way a reflection of reality. A creator is master over it's creations, it's a simple concept that scifi breaks to create a fantastical environment of storytelling (sells tickets and books).

Since you cannot prove this entity doesn't exist when speaking in a thread about that Entity's Son there is no need to argue the fundamentals. It should be assumed because the content is about an individual that claimed to be the Son of God that such a God exists, even if theoretically.

If I can't prove Muhammad isn't the great holy prophet, does that mean mathmatics are evil?

Mathmatics is a technology that had to be developed, so yes, there is a darkside to all technology, including mathmatics. You can't have the atom bomb without mathmatics, for example.

If you believe that only one god exists, and that all the thousands of other gods don't exist, then you are already 99.9% athiest. You just haven't gotten over that last 0.1% yet.

Yes, but the "all gods are the same God" argument is the really challenging one. It breaks down to two groups: for and against.

-Sab

smiddy

Jesus Christ , no blasphemeny intended , should I even try to answer some of these responses ? Against my better judgement I will .

Sab.Thats a copout your argument could be said about all the writers of all the books of the bible.

LV101 : Have you been to a library lateley ? Of course his sayings could have been recorded , as any prophet before him was , and he was the greatest prophet .

Heaven : So the son had no idea what his heavenly father had in mind ?

Satanus : Good points

Tec. You beleive what other people have written , but you dont want to beleive what Christ may have written !

Pterist :" He writes on human hearts" , well as I said on another thread Jehovah`s Witnesses prey on the gullible

smiddy

HintOfLime

It's really hard to put one's self in God's shoes.

Honestly, I don't really care about god's shoe size.

Lets get this thread back on topic, which was: the figure Jesus was not a competent teacher, as he neglected the use of one of the greatest teaching aids - the writen form. (Likewise none of his supposed apostles were very bright either, as none of them wrote any of it down as he spoke.. the stories weren't written until decades after his supposed death.)

- Lime

PSacramento

X - Not to be argumentative, but you make several assertions.

1. Witnesses that can be contacted? Are they not dead? If so, how can you contact them?

When Paul wrote that letter, many were still alive. 2nd generation Christians had access to the likes of John for example and Paul wrote and started preached just a few years after Christ "died".

2. Gospels and letters were NOT passed down in a 'vacuum'? Are you sure about that?

No reason to think that they were.

3. Majority of historians view the bible as historically reliable? That is a pretty major assertion, don't you think?

Not from what I have read.

PSacramento

Lets get this thread back on topic, which was: the figure Jesus was not a competent teacher, as he neglected the use of one of the greatest teaching aids - the writen form. (Likewise none of his supposed apostles were very bright either, as none of them wrote any of it down as he spoke.. the stories weren't written until decades after his supposed death.)

First off it was not uncommon for a teacher to have OTHERS write for him.

But I wanna adress this part here about the stories being written decades aftyer his death:

The oldest christian creed we have is probably

1 Corinthians 15:3-8:

“For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; And that He was buried, and that He rose again the third day according to the scriptures: And that He was seen of Cephas, then of the twelve: After that, He was seen of above five hundred brethren at once; of whom the greater part remain unto this present, but some are fallen asleep. After that, He was seen of James; then of all the apostles. And last of all He was seen of me also, as of one born out of due time.”

In that we have what Paul was taught and his view and going on what Paul was taught:

Paul was t aught that after his conversio n so we are looking at a date of about 35AD, give or take a year or so, so tha t is only just a few years after Jesus "death".

Even if we look at 30 years after his death when the gosples started to circulate that is still in the l ifetime of the witnesses and perhaps more importantly, the c ritics to come out and say "Nope, THAT never happened that way".

tec

Tec. You beleive what other people have written , but you dont want to beleive what Christ may have written !

??

minimus

He was a teacher, not a writer.

If Jesus was the" Greatest Teacher" the" Son of God" then why ?...........

Share this