Sodaiho Sodaiho

Was Jesus just following an existing myth?

Was Jesus just following an existing myth?

staging a messiahship

With palms together,

 

There is an interesting article in the N Y Times today about a stone tablet found amid the Dead Sea Scrolls.  Apparently it suggests that the notion of a suffering messiah who would rise in three days was a common belief in the century prior to the Christian Jesus.

 

The article suggests:

If such a messianic description really is there, it will contribute to a developing re-evaluation of both popular and scholarly views of Jesus, since it suggests that the story of his death and resurrection was not unique but part of a recognized Jewish tradition at the time.

 

Hmmm. The death and resurrection myth prior to Jesus' birth?  It would seem this adds to the notion advance some decades ago by a Jewish scholar suggesting this whole Jesus script was a scheme to get Jesus recognized as the Messiah, that Jesus was aware of the things that needd to happen before they happened in order to meet the criteria.

 

And later:

 

Mr. Knohl said that it was less important whether Simon was the messiah of the stone than the fact that it strongly suggested that a savior who died and rose after three days was an established concept at the time of Jesus. He notes that in the Gospels, Jesus makes numerous predictions of his suffering and New Testament scholars say such predictions must have been written in by later followers because there was no such idea present in his day.

But there was, he said, and “Gabriel’s Revelation” shows it.

“His mission is that he has to be put to death by the Romans to suffer so his blood will be the sign for redemption to come,” Mr. Knohl said. “This is the sign of the son of Joseph. This is the conscious view of Jesus himself. This gives the Last Supper an absolutely different meaning. To shed blood is not for the sins of people but to bring redemption to Israel.”

 

Strange.

Link

Be well

 

 

 

 

924,130 views 969 replies
Reply #776 Top

When we try our best to be holy, that is when we lose our relationship with God. The Bible says that our best won't cut it. Our best is filthy rags, not holiness. That's why Jesus had to give His best for us. His best was holy.
End of quote

 

Jythier, As a Christian, I assume you respect God's word. Please refer to Lev. 19-20, what we refer to as parasha kedoshim. In it you will find that God does indeed command us to seek holiness and He outlines exactly how to do it. The whole portion outlines a commitment to holy life right down to describing our relationship to strangers. It is nothing short of a call to social action on behalf of the Holy One, blessed be Him name. 

Humility is one thing, but describing the image of God as filthy rags is quite another.

Be well.

Reply #777 Top
Why? Because it's different from yours?
End of quote


no because as I say "biblical" I mean your view isn't holding to what scripture says. So your view it's not because it's diff from mine but that it's diff than what the bible says.

You believe in a god who is a bad designer. I believe in a god who is perfect.
End of quote


No, I believe in a GOD who is perfect. How could I believe in a God who is a bad designer?

Whoever designed the human eye was a moron.
End of quote


really why? Most say, and use the eye as an example, is a miracle because of its intricacies. So God, is a moran? Why? The eye is a marvelous creation.

Whoever designed HIV is evil.
End of quote


now this I can agree. But it's not God. HIV is a result of sinful behavior and living in a sinful world. Why do you blame God for sin? Because he allows it?

That's a fact of life, it has to do with how innocent children can be infected because of what their mothers did.
End of quote


this is what's meant about the sins of the parents fall on the children. It's all part of the sinful environment we live in. If I drive drunk, someone innocent may drive and it's all because of my sinful, prideful choice. It's not God's fault. It's all about being ME MINDED instead of me being OTHER MINDED as scripture commands us to be. Whenever we stray from God's best we pay the price.

And if the Bible seems to claim that G-d is not perfect and good, I obviously misunderstand the Bible. So I better read again until I figure it out.
End of quote


nope doesn't claim this at all. I would suggest the latter would be a good idea.

Here's the thing. Before "creation" we assume (at least I do) that only God was. Nothing else.
End of quote


no, that's not true. We read throughtout scripture that God the FAther had fellowship with his son. Christ mentions this in John 17 as well.

So, when God created the world, He created it from himself, since there was nothing else.
End of quote


No he created it FOR himself not FROM himself. If God is God, then who are we to limit him? First he created the world out of nothing ex nihilo nil. Then he created man FROM this created world.

Again, show me a place where God is not. Do so and you diminish God.
End of quote


I agree with this.







Reply #778 Top

no because as I say "biblical" I mean your view isn't holding to what scripture says. So your view it's not because it's diff from mine but that it's diff than what the bible says.
End of quote


Actually, my view is totally compatible with scripture.

I don't even have to mistranslate "eretz" ("land") as "earth" or "Elohim" as a plural to arrive at my view.


No, I believe in a GOD who is perfect. How could I believe in a God who is a bad designer?
End of quote


That is what confuses me so much about you. How can you?



really why? Most say, and use the eye as an example, is a miracle because of its intricacies. So God, is a moran? Why? The eye is a marvelous creation.
End of quote


No, it isn't. Many animals have better eyes and even we, human beings, can create better eyes. There are so many design flaws in the human eye, it's ridiculous to assume that it was created directly by G-d.


now this I can agree. But it's not God. HIV is a result of sinful behavior and living in a sinful world. Why do you blame God for sin? Because he allows it?
End of quote


A Muslim terrorist blows up a church in Israel. The victims need blood transfusions. The blood transfusions were infected. The victims survive, but develop AIDS.

Which sin were they punished for?

I know that HIV is a product of evolution. I do not believe that G-d (directly) created it. My god, if he is not yours, does NOT create evil things; although his world might.

HIV alone is not evil. It's just nature. But the fact that people with souls can suffer from it makes it evil. But I don't believe that this is what G-d intended. He gave us free will to make us more like Him. And in doing so He allowed phenomenons that have simply evolved to acquire moral values.

I probably have to learn (more) Arabic to understand better how very poetic Semitic languages work. But from learning Semitic languages so far I know that Hebrew is more poetic than English and has to be understood as such when read.

But if you believe that G-d would have given Moses all of Richard Dawkins' writings instead of a one-week summary, you overestimate the brilliance of Jews 3000 years ago.



Reply #779 Top
Again, show me a place where God is not. Do so and you diminish God.
End of quote


I don't agree with this. If God is so big He can be everywhere, then why isn't God big enough to choose of His own will not to be somewhere?

Of course, the only place I'm thinking of is Hell, a place prepared for Satan and his angels.
Reply #780 Top

no, that's not true. We read throughtout scripture that God the FAther had fellowship with his son. Christ mentions this in John 17 as well.
End of quote

This sort of thinking is why Christianity may not be monotheistic. Before creation there can be nothing other than the singularity we call God. 

No he created it FOR himself not FROM himself. If God is God, then who are we to limit him? First he created the world out of nothing ex nihilo nil. Then he created man FROM this created world.
End of quote

Vast Nothingness is God, KFC. So, Ex Nihilo is of God. A such a point in cosmology, we simply have to let go of any possible anthropomorphism.  God is not a "being" in any sense we can possibly understand. The scriptures, Hebrew and Christian, were written by and for men who thought anthromorphically regarding a deity. Its time we get out of that box.

 

The Kabbalists talk about God contracting Himself to make room for His creation.  The light of creation was so strong that it burst causing God-coated shards to scatter throughout creation Each time we do a mitzvot (follow a commandment) a shard is returned to God, thus repairing the world.  Their way of addressing the "Transcendant God/Immanent" God problem. Neat trick, but another box.

 

Reply #781 Top

That's exactly what scripture says NOT to do. Yes we are to be still before the Lord at times but always with a word of his on our hearts. Jesus said in the context of prayer to go into a closet and not be as the Pharisees praying on street corners for their own benefit so others would think how righteous they were. But you may want to peruse just the gospel if not just Psalm 119 and see how important God's word was for us to bind up to our hearts and minds. Do a word search on "the word of God" "commands of God" "his law" "precepts" etc. When Jesus was tempted in the desert, he went all three times to scripture. When he was teaching, he was constantly reaching back into OT scripture. So why shouldn't we?
End of quote

We are talking about a multiplicity of gates to God. Study is but one gate, but mouthing scripture will get you no where. We study to become one with God,, to bring praise and honor top God. We also pray to do the same, and do acts of loving-kindness, as well.  These are the three pillars of Judaism.  They are also essential to Buddhism and, I suspect, Christianity.  My point was belief is not enough, nor is a knowledge of scripture.  In fact, these actually blind us to knowing God intimately.

 

Be well.

Reply #782 Top

I don't agree with this. If God is so big He can be everywhere, then why isn't God big enough to choose of His own will not to be somewhere? Of course, the only place I'm thinking of is Hell, a place prepared for Satan and his angels.
End of quote

You are making God a being, as if He were bounded.

Hell, Satan, and his angels? From my POV, these are Christian fairy tales with no foundation in reality.

Be well.

Reply #783 Top
That is what confuses me so much about you. How can you?
End of quote


I'm not following you Leauki. How can I believe God is perfect?

Which sin were they punished for?
End of quote


sin is like a sickness that sweeps the earth. Innocent people die as a result of sin in the world all the time. Nobody is exempt from being tainted somehow with this sickness and sometimes it does lead to death in the short run. That's what God said to Adam and Eve right in the garden. Don't eat or you will surely die.

Of course, the only place I'm thinking of is Hell, a place prepared for Satan and his angels.
End of quote


I was thinking of this also, but then there's a scripture somewhere (I think) that says even in hell God is there...but then we know that Hell is a place where one becomes separated from God. So I'd have to think about this one.

We do have a story in Luke 16 where Jesus is speaking to one in Hades (hell's waiting room).

This sort of thinking is why Christianity may not be monotheistic. Before creation there can be nothing other than the singularity we call God.
End of quote


No Christianity is monotheistic but the trinity is a hard concept to figure out. One God revealed in three persons. Stay tuned, maybe I'll write on this one soon!! Too much to write here.

We see the trinity right in Chap 1 of Genesis.

The scriptures, Hebrew and Christian, were written by and for men who thought anthromorphically regarding a deity.
End of quote


at times they did but they also wrote that God is spirit and the many names for God describe his attributes which are many. Moses was not allowed to see God and live. He was as close to any (being hid in the rock) and he came down from the mountain with his face shining. In the NT we see Stephen's face was shining as well when he got a vision of Jesus right before he died.

My point was belief is not enough, nor is a knowledge of scripture.
End of quote


well according to the bible, the Torah and the teachings of Jesus, belief is the only thing needed for salvation. Nothing else is needed. It says right in the Torah and repeated by Paul in Romans 4 that Abraham was saved by faith. He was saved outside the law and outside of circumcision. Knowledge of scripture is a good thing only in that it explains God and his will to us, but we are not to just be spouting off scripture for knowledge sake either.

From my POV, these are Christian fairy tales with no foundation in reality.
End of quote


I understand but one thing is sure. One day we will all find out for sure. Then we will know the truth. Right now there is a divided line. Those that do and those that don't believe in these "so called fairy tales.

There's a saying that goes...."hell is truth found out too late." That's why it's better to investigate these things now instead of waiting until then just in case. From my POV I believe in angels and Satan and have seen and experienced the effects of both.









Reply #784 Top
Sodaiho you didn't answer my earlier question...what happens when one breaks his god teacup? Does he break his god? Or does he just replace his teacup god with another teacup?

Reply #785 Top
Wherever evil (sin) is, God is not.

So, from your point of view, then, God is limited and not omnipresent?
End of quote


No. Saying this doesn't induce a limitation of God or His omnipresence.

It's true because God is Infinite Goodness while evil is the absense of good and sin is willful thought, word, or action contrary to the law of God.

God is Holy and loves and wills only what is good and hates what is evil.

And what about God, Himself, when he partners up with the Adversary to make Job's life a nightmare?
End of quote


There are many lessons that come from the Book of Job. It's certain that God didn't actually meet and wager with Satan, for that's a literary expression driving home the truth that Satan is opposed to God and resents that we should love and serve Him. Job was a good man devoted to God. Satan wished to rob God of the honor and glory given by Job.

God allowing Satan to afflict Job was very difficult but no more difficult than His permission of other temporal afflictions that we have in our lives. It is the ordinary problem of suffering the difficulty of reconciling a merciful God which certainly exists with the fact of moral and physical evil which also exist.


In this world there are things better than bodily health and worldly goods. Many people think more of their honor than of his life. The asset of a noble character is another. Almighty God gave JOb the opportunity of a noblility to be attained only by way of the Cross similiar to that of Christ (this is very difficult for some to understand).

Job was enabled to glorify God far more by fidelty when things went wrong then by fidelty when they were going right. ANd God more than compensated Job for his temperoal trials by eternal happiness.

The answer to the problem of suffering in general is also the answer to the story of Job, to a great extent. All through God permitted affliction for the greater good of Job and Satan inflicted punishment for the greater misery. God intended the justification of right principles, Satan their destruction. God was more reliable than Satan for He was ever prepared to assist Job by His grace as often as Job demanded it, while Satan only intended the degradation of Job and the insulting of God.

Bottom line to the Book of Job: God is always reliable, Satan never is. And above all, when we review the lasting results of their influence.

God Himself must be held to a moral standard.
End of quote


By whom...one of His sinful creatures? It's not our business to determine what God should do and not do. He can do all things whatsoever He pleases for He is ALmighty. God has Supreme ownership over us. Our end is for nothing else than to love and serve Him and it's not our business to determine the way of serving God. It belongs to God to determine that. It's our business to serve Him according to His wishes and not our own.

When He does something evil we cannot just say, "Well, that's God's will" without seriously compromising our understanding of good and evil as actualities.
End of quote


God is Infinite and Supreme Goodness in Himself and Infinitely good to His creatures. that means He cannot deceive or be deceived and therefore He cannot do anything evil for it would go against Himself.

Forget our own understanding of good and evil..it must be lined up with God's or if not leads to our ruination. Adam and Eve tried that. God created them in a state of sanctity and immortality, and they sinned against God's will and He punished them in body and in soul. In body, were immediately banished from Paradise, and subjected to disease, pains and death. In soul, they lost God's grace and on this account all right to Heaven.
Reply #786 Top

Sodaiho you didn't answer my earlier question...what happens when one breaks his god teacup? Does he break his god? Or does he just replace his teacup god with another teacup?
End of quote

KFC, First, the material of the teacup remains the material of the teacup.  It just changes form. Since I experience God as the entire universe with no exception, then all material is a part of God.  "Teacup" is simply a name for the form the material has taken.  One cannot "break" God.

I hope this helps.

Be well.

Reply #787 Top
One cannot "break" God.
End of quote


well that's good to know....lol. But seriously you are speaking of Pantheism correct?

Do you know that the basic claim of pantheism is self-defeating?

For instance the claim that reason does not apply to ultimate reality is self-defeating. The statement made by Pantheism "reason can tell us nothing about God." is either a reasonable statement (either true or false) or it's not. It appears to be a reasonable statement that reason gives us no information about God....except that it just did. It just told us that we can't use reason. So we have to use reason to deny the use of reason which makes logic an inescapeable reality. If the pantheist avoids this by saying it was not a reasonable statement then we have no reason to believe it. They are just speaking gibberish. To be honest this is exactly what I hear when a Pantheist speaks.

Pantheism leaves no rule to guide one in his actions. There is a lack of moral foundation in this belief system. I read somewhere that pantheism actually promotes cruelty in the name of spiritual expansion. For instance the lack of social concern in India. If people suffer because of their "karma" then to help them would be working against God because it would stop one from working off his own karma debt and it would show that I am still attached to the world rather than indifferent to it. So it's better to ignore all suffering than do anything to alleviate it. Action beyond good and evil equates evil with goodness.

This is a total contradiction to Christianity which commands us to do for one another and to be other minded and in that way we show the glory of God in heaven. To see evil and do nothing is a sin and dishonors God .







Reply #788 Top

No. Saying this doesn't induce a limitation of God or His omnipresence. It's true because God is Infinite Goodness while evil is the absence of good and sin is willful thought, word, or action contrary to the law of God.
End of quote

Yet, God created this when He created Man and infused him with free will and an evil inclination. So, God is not responsible for His creation?  Or did this omniscient God just want to "test" man, knowing due to His omniscience, how he would do?

 

Lula, you say God is infinite then say he is not, by suggesting He is not in the same place as evil.  First, evil is not an entity, it is a behavior. Since God created the conditions for this behavior to arise, He is at least partly responsible for it. Second, you really must stop thinking of God as a being with human-like attributes. It will stunt your spiritual growth.

As to Job, the text is quite clear that the adversary presented himself to the Lord (Job 1:6).  God defends Job, but the adversary  (a divine prosecutor, if you will, not the Devil)) teases Him.  Later in chapter two, God says that the adversary has "incited" Him to destroy Job. (Job 2:3) God then turns Job over to the adversary to have his way with him, except for his life.

You are correct, I think, to not take these stories as literal, yet many do.  They are aggadah, not halakah. Aggadah informs us about spiritual, mystical aspects of our relationship with the divine, as opposed to the halakic aspects of Torah which outline our (Jewish) actual life rules. Now, the question is, why did the author of Job present God and the adversary in this way and use Job's life as an exemplar?

Your explication is interesting and one view among many.  Job is a very complex book and has been thrashed around by theologians for millenia.

I am more interested in the cosmological questions. To get to these we must try our best to get to the beginning, ground zero, as it were.  Now, from a Buddhist perspective this would be impossible as we argue there is no real beginning, but rather a constant process of change. Within western religion, however, there are starting points, like the Big Bang, or the creation stories in Genesis, etc. At such a point, we ask where is God or more to the point, where is God not?  The answer must be, God is everywhere, otherwise he is bounded by some sort of parameter.  KFC argues, among many, that the world was created "ex nihilo" yet, where does nothing come but from God, thus a part of "the Infinite" as I refer to Him often. God made himself into earth, sky, animating earth to make man and so forth...all aggadah mind you...stories designed to aid us in making sense of our beginnings. As for me, I cannot imagine a possibility of the absence of God. Even in Hell (as Christians understand the place, God must be. As it is a place made by God, of God, for God's purposes.

Now, such a theology has implications for the nature of the Infinite.  This is where I ask you and others to stand outside of the ordinary human habit of thinking in anthropomorphic terms. God cannot be a "being" as we understand the term. He is everything. She is everything.  It is everything. Gender and beingness are something we add to God, not that God needs.

Be well.

 

Reply #789 Top

well that's good to know....lol. But seriously you are speaking of Pantheism correct?
End of quote

 

Actually, no.  I am pointing to another POV, more a admixture of east and west, called panentheism. See link.

This POV has God both making up the universe and apart from the universe, at the same time.  Much like the relationship Zen Buddhism suggests between the Relative Truth and the Absolute Truth. Different perspectives of the same thing, truth...or in this case, reality.

Be well.

 

Reply #790 Top
God made himself into earth, sky, animating earth to make man and so forth...all aggadah mind you...stories designed to aid us in making sense of our beginnings. As for me, I cannot imagine a possibility of the absence of God. Even in Hell (as Christians understand the place, God must be. As it is a place made by God, of God, for God's purposes.
End of quote


no. God made us apart from himself. God can do that. For some, he has breathed his spirit into us. That is what joins us to him. That's what Christ spoke of as he and the father are one. We can say the same. Christ is in us and we are in Christ joined by his spirit.

Hell is a place of separation from God. It's not that God can't be there. It's a place where God separates the holy from the unholy like wheat and chaff get separated at the harvest. Same idea.

God cannot be a "being" as we understand the term. He is everything.
End of quote


Christians understand Christ as God in the flesh. God is spirit. He came and put on flesh like we put on a costume. His form (morphe) is unchanging. He put on the form (schema) of a servant which does change.

I am pointing to another POV, more a admixture of east and west, called panentheism
End of quote


Ok, I know about this as well. Not alot since it's fairly new to me but have some understanding of this.

Panentheism says that God is constantly changing. I guess because he's always being perfected if one believes this. How can we know this if there is not some unchanging standard by which to measure change? Because we are moving along with it we don't notice the world is rotating on its axis and revolving around the sun. It sure feels like we are standing still. If we toss a ball up into the air inside an airplane we don't realize it's traveling at 500 mph because we are moving with it.

We can only be sure something is moving when we measure it by something that is not moving. So how can we know that everything is changing unless we can look at something that is not changing? Panentheism has no explanation for this.

Also from what I understand God is finite and temporal in the belief of Panentheism. What kind of a God is that? Why would one want to follow a finite and temporal God?

Reply #791 Top
Leuki wrote:
Nobody "inherits" sin.
End of quote


KFC wrote:
it's a genetic trait passed on from our first parents so call it what you want but we are gravely ill with this sin and the reason we all die today.
End of quote


Actually KFC, it isn't the 'sin' that is inherited but rather the 'punishment' of the Fathers' sin.

The scriptural passages you might be eluding to are:

Deuteronomy 5:9
...visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me...


Ex 34:7, Num 14:18, and several more.

The Hebrew word that was translated into iniquity is av-on (עון) which translates to consequences or punishment of sin (חטאה Kha-tah meaning to miss the mark).
Reply #792 Top

I'm not following you Leauki. How can I believe God is perfect?
End of quote


No, don't make up questions I didn't ask. You have so many times told me that you believe that G-d created each species including man individually. Yet all these designs are faulty.

My god, that is the god I believe in, is perfect.

Your god, that is the god you believe in, designs things like the human eye.



sin is like a sickness that sweeps the earth. Innocent people die as a result of sin in the world all the time. Nobody is exempt from being tainted somehow with this sickness and sometimes it does lead to death in the short run. That's what God said to Adam and Eve right in the garden. Don't eat or you will surely die.
End of quote


You haven't answered my question. Which sin are they dying for?

"Don't eat or you will surely die" contradicts the idea that one should suffer for a sin one didn't commit.

Which sin are the people in my gedanken experiment being punished for?

Is your god imperfect at punishing sins too?



We see the trinity right in Chap 1 of Genesis.
End of quote


We have been through this.

There is no hint to a trinity anywhere in Genesis.

1. The word "elohim" is singular, as the verb forms clearly show since they are all in the singular ("Elohim says" rather than "Elohim say").

2. Even if you read the word "elohim" as plural, it is the wrong grammatical plural for a trinity. Hebrew has THREE, not two, numbers; one for singular, one for intrinsic plurals, and one for non-intrinsic plurals. "Elohim", if read as plural, is a non-intrinsic plural, hence cannot represent a "trinity".

3. Lots and lots of times in the Tora a trinity is specifically and most radically rejected with the sentence "G-d is one". If the author of the Bible had specifically wanted to reject a trinity, just to address people like you, he couldn't have been more direct and specific!

You seem to rewind the tape whenever you are confronted with facts that don't fit your beliefs. How will you arrive at the truth if you keep restarting the movie?
Reply #793 Top
No, don't make up questions I didn't ask.
End of quote


I'm not making up anything. You asked this...and I didn't understand the question..

That is what confuses me so much about you. How can you?
End of quote


so I asked myself..."how can I what? Believe that God is perfect? Because you were accusing me of believing that God is a bad designer and when I said I don't you asked..."how can you?"

You have so many times told me that you believe that G-d created each species including man individually. Yet all these designs are faulty.
End of quote


yes. and I don't believe they were faulty when he first designed them.

You haven't answered my question. Which sin are they dying for?

"Don't eat or you will surely die" contradicts the idea that one should suffer for a sin one didn't commit.

Which sin are the people in my gedanken experiment being punished for?
End of quote


We all have inherited the sin of rebellion. Right from birth. Rebellion against God. Passed down from Adam and Eve to their children.

It's only when we turn from this sin of rebellion, recognize it and repent are we saved.

You seem to rewind the tape whenever you are confronted with facts that don't fit your beliefs. How will you arrive at the truth if you keep restarting the movie?
End of quote


no, I could say the same about you Leauki. Truth is what I am after. I'm hoping to write about the Trinity soon like I told Sodaiho. The facts are in scripture. I'm not looking for outside facts to dispute what I believe scripture is teaching us. How will you arrive at the truth if you don't WATCH THE MOVIE? Or better yet...read the book. It's always better than the movie.












Reply #794 Top
Actually KFC, it isn't the 'sin' that is inherited but rather the 'punishment' of the Fathers' sin.

The scriptural passages you might be eluding to are:

Deuteronomy 5:9
...visiting the iniquity of the fathers upon the children unto the third and fourth generation of them that hate me...
End of quote


No AD that's something totally different. Go to Deut 24:16 and you'll read this:

"The fathers shall NOT be put to death for the children, neither shall the children be put to death for the fathers; every man shall be put to death for his OWN SIN."

What you're talking about is teachings that will affect future generations and will be passed down. So if you're an unbeliever say, you will teach that to your children and so forth. What starts with the first generation quite usually goes down about four generations before it becomes non effective.

In scripture each person stands before God accountable for their own sin.

The Hebrew word that was translated into iniquity is av-on (עון) which translates to consequences or punishment of sin (חטאה Kha-tah meaning to miss the mark).
End of quote


Yes, in the Greek which I'm better acquainted there are two words. The first is Harmartema and means to "miss the mark."

The other word is Parabasis and means "to overstp a forbidden line." This occurs when a man deliberately or accidently steps over the line of the law of God.



Reply #795 Top
No AD that's something totally different. Go to Deut 24:16 and you'll read this:

"The fathers shall NOT be put to death for the children, neither shall the children be put to death for the fathers; every man shall be put to death for his OWN SIN."

What you're talking about is teachings that will affect future generations and will be passed down. So if you're an unbeliever say, you will teach that to your children and so forth. What starts with the first generation quite usually goes down about four generations before it becomes non effective.

In scripture each person stands before God accountable for their own sin.
End of quote


KFC, your statement of:

it's a genetic trait passed on from our first parents so call it what you want but we are gravely ill with this sin and the reason we all die today.
End of quote


In your (page 30) response to Leuki came across to me that you were saying that sins were inherited in reference to the sin of Adam. My apologies if I mis-understood.
Reply #796 Top
1. The word "elohim" is singular, as the verb forms clearly show since they are all in the singular ("Elohim says" rather than "Elohim say").
End of quote


Leuki, is Elohim an exception?

It seems to me that the singular of Elohim is El which follows the Hebrew standard of him (heem) suffix of plurality? As in Yehuda (one person), Yehudim (those of Yehuda)?

2. Even if you read the word "elohim" as plural, it is the wrong grammatical plural for a trinity. Hebrew has THREE, not two, numbers; one for singular, one for intrinsic plurals, and one for non-intrinsic plurals. "Elohim", if read as plural, is a non-intrinsic plural, hence cannot represent a "trinity".
End of quote


I agree that just because Elohim being plural has the intrinsic value of trinity.

3. Lots and lots of times in the Tora a trinity is specifically and most radically rejected with the sentence "G-d is one". If the author of the Bible had specifically wanted to reject a trinity, just to address people like you, he couldn't have been more direct and specific!
End of quote


Leuki, you would probably know better but I thought Echad (אחד) meant properly "united" as in 1 team.
Reply #797 Top

no. God made us apart from himself. God can do that. For some, he has breathed his spirit into us. That is what joins us to him. That's what Christ spoke of as he and the father are one. We can say the same. Christ is in us and we are in Christ joined by his spirit.
End of quote

We will disgree on the earth aspect, no worries.  Let's talk a bit about the spirit aspect.  You say God is spirit and he breathed His spirit into us.  We Jews say its Ruach Ha-kadosh.

At this point, even if earth were made from something other than God, God has been infused through His breath, into us.  Are you then suggesting, what?  Perhaps the breath of God leaves us? That the breath of God is not God? Moreover, the phrase "in His image" points to the spiritual investment of man (earth) with the Divine Being's breath, or in other words, the creation of a "soul".  A non-dualistic approach, or in other words as I use it, a panentheistic approach, opens us to a realization of complete Oneness.  Religious mystical practices of every variety I am aware, gets us to this precise point.

Be well. 

Reply #798 Top
Hell, Satan, and his angels? From my POV, these are Christian fairy tales with no foundation in reality.
End of quote


The existence of Hell, Satan and his angels (demons) do indeed have foundation in reality.

Of all people, SoDaiho, you ought to understand that if there is an up, then there has to be a down, if there is a right, there must be a left, if there is good, there must be evil.

It follows logically, then that if there is a place where friends of God abide eternally, then there must be a place where His enemies abide eternally...that place is Hell.

Christ continually warned HIs followers with the condemnation of the wicked to Hell. He spoke of eternal life in Heaven and eternal life in Hell.

God is Supreme Good and Supreme Justice. He gave man the power of self direction which enable him to reach heavenly heights or fall into unfathomable depths. Eccl. 15:17-18, "The Lord hath set water and fire before thee, stretch forth thy hand to which thou wilt. Before man is life and death, good and evil; that which he shall choose shall be given to him."



Reply #799 Top
SODAIHO POSTS:
My point was belief is not enough, nor is a knowledge of scripture.
End of quote


I agree. Scripture tells us even the demons believe, so it take more than just belief. And we can't say that knowledge of Scripture is enough because, for example, there were millions of people who never read a word of Scripture before the printing press was invented.

KFC POSTS:
It says right in the Torah and repeated by Paul in Romans 4 that Abraham was saved by faith. He was saved outside the law and outside of circumcision.
End of quote


Abraham was saved by his living faith, in other words, not only did he believe but Abraham acted on his belief..The dominant thing in Abraham's life was his obedience and love of God. When given a supreme test, love and obedience to God came before his own son's life.



Reply #800 Top

The existence of Hell, Satan and his angels (demons) do indeed have foundation in reality. Of all people, SoDaiho, you ought to understand that if there is an up, then there has to be a down, if there is a right, there must be a left, if there is good, there must be evil. It follows logically, then that if there is a place where friends of God abide eternally, then there must be a place where His enemies abide eternally...that place is Hell.
End of quote

I am not arguing at all that good and evil do not exist, just that they do not exist as beings or entities.  Good and evil exist is our minds as judgements of behavior or at least decriptions of the value of that behavior. They are on a continuum of morality: good -to- bad, one line. I do not agree that there is an abode after life. Heaven or Hell, or anything in between. We are with Him in varying degrees from positive to negative in this life. From a my POV, we exist in His abode right now, always.  When we live in positive accordance with God, that is at one with Him, we are in heaven.  When we are not living at one with God we are living in hell. In either case, He is with us, dwelling within us, it is up to us to open our hearts to Him.

But the sort of thing popularized by Milton?  Forget it.  Great poetry, but hardly reality.

Be well.