FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.


Go Back   FRDB Archives > Archives > Biblical Criticism - 2001
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Today at 05:55 AM

Notices

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 04-16-2001, 09:14 AM   #1
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Post Flushing Barkers punchbowl

Something to remember here is that Dan Barker did not "finish the race" and as a drop-out cannot know because he does not have the mind of God. To have finished the race is to have the mind of God and surely, if us dumb believers can obtain the mind of God the mythmakers that wrote the bible must have had the mind of God.

If this be the case the challenge made by Barker is easy which does not mean that it is easy for me (in case you think I am willing to take up the challenge). If the challenge is easy it must give an account of the same and prove that Barker and co. is understanding the bible wrong while reading the same words.

It will go something like this:

Christ was not crucified nor was he raised because the bible states that Jesus was crucified and Jesus was raised. The question now becomes: who was Jesus and who was Christ.

Since Jesus was both God and human he had a dual nature. His Christ identity was God and his human identity was Jesus. From this follows that the human identity was crucified and was raised. If our humanity is but a condiditon of being that pertains to the being it is easy to see how our illusory human nature can be crucified and raised into the mind of God or Christ identity. The resurrection of Jesus into the mind of God only proves that reason prevailed after the crisis moment took place. Hence the Divine comedy instead of a tragedy.

This is made very clear in the bible when Jesus the Jew was convicted and Bar-abbas "the man" (read it!) was set free. Bar-abbas was the son of the father and therefore Christ and Jesus the Jew was the reborn Joseph to be crucified.

All of the rest is decoration to make faith acceptable for those who wish to enter the race in their effort to resolve the identity crisis each one of us or will be faced with sooner or later in life. Having said this these decorations must be valid components to be recognized if and when we have finished the race. This concept would even justify the existence of St. Nicholas as the ancient holy man who rewards children with justice and compassion.

It is only when we have finished the race that "all will be made clear."

Amos


 
Old 04-16-2001, 05:54 PM   #2
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Question

Quote:
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Amos123:
It is only when we have finished the race that "all will be made clear."</font>
You're rambling. Are you trying to say that, only after we die will we know the truth? It's hard to tell, because you're speaking in opaque metaphors.

If this is the case, I'd like to know how many times you have died to obtain this essential wisdom that you are sharing with us. Since any answer to this question would make you sound silly, Amos, I must assume that my interpretation of your "finish the race" metaphor is incorrect. Unless, of course, you are silly.

As for Dan Barker, you seem to be questioning his claim to be a recovered fundamentalist Christian (again, hard to tell what you mean). Frankly, I don't think his background enters into it much. Barker's arguments stand or fall on their own.

Further, is the "challenge" you refer to Barker's "Leave No Stone Unturned" Easter Challenge? If so (your language is too ambiguous, in case you missed my point), then the challenge requires no special wisdom. It is a simple matter of reading comprehension; of narrative synthesis. What happened on the day of the Crucifixion, and the days that followed. The four Gospels tell it four ways; can they be harmonized?

I wouldn't be so sure.
 
Old 04-16-2001, 09:46 PM   #3
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Post

Quote:
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Grumpy:
You're rambling. Are you trying to say that, only after we die will we know the truth? It's hard to tell, because you're speaking in opaque metaphors.

</font>
No, I am saying that when we have finished the race we will have obtained the mind of God which at once means that we do not have to die physically to finish the race.
Quote:
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">


If this is the case, I'd like to know how many times you have died to obtain this essential wisdom that you are sharing with us. Since any answer to this question would make you sound silly, Amos, I must assume that my interpretation of your "finish the race" metaphor is incorrect. Unless, of course, you are silly.

As for Dan Barker, you seem to be questioning his claim to be a recovered fundamentalist Christian (again, hard to tell what you mean). Frankly, I don't think his background enters into it much. Barker's arguments stand or fall on their own.

Further, is the "challenge" you refer to Barker's "Leave No Stone Unturned" Easter Challenge? If so (your language is too ambiguous, in case you missed my point), then the challenge requires no special wisdom. It is a simple matter of reading comprehension; of narrative synthesis. What happened on the day of the Crucifixion, and the days that followed. The four Gospels tell it four ways; can they be harmonized?

I wouldn't be so sure.
</font>
Grumpy, If you would allow me to explain my controversial opinion it would be much appreciated.

So yes, I understand his challenge and I am referring to the Easter Challenge and I am saying that they can be rationalized and harmonized without paradoxes or contradictions. I also agree that we will be reading the same words but come to a different understanding of them.

In my example Jesus of Nazareth, as he was called to be sure, had a dual nature. His Jesus identity was that of a Jew and his Christ identity was that of God and wherein he was Son of Man, or Son of God . . . to render Man equal to God in who's image man was also created.

Pay close attention here because it was the Jews and only the Jews that convicted Jesus the Jew while neither Pilate not Herod could find any fault with "the Man" and were thus not looking at Jesus the Jew but at the identity of Son of Man.

Next we see that Jesus the Jew was crucified while Bar-abbas was set free. Bar-abbas means son of the Father, and thus it was the son of God identity that was set free. Since the human identity of Jesus pertains to his ego awareness it was only the ego that was crucified to set free the God identity from human inequities and thus the state of heaven was regained while upon earth.

Now if you go to Mk.16 you will see that, at least in the NAB, the narrative continues beyond crucifixion and it is here that Jesus is only and always referred to as Christ and never as Jesus while before Jesus was never adresses as Christ but always as Jesus.

Ascention now means that Jesus must be recalled into the Christ identity wherefore he was seen to have walked through the wall and into the upper room. The upper room now becomes the subconscious mind and the wall was the great divide the bible talks about. This divide is between our conscious and subconscious mind and to have been "learned in the reign of God . . . we can recall from both the old and the new."

Etc. Etc.

Thanks, Amos.



[This message has been edited by Amos123 (edited April 16, 2001).]
 
Old 04-17-2001, 03:42 PM   #4
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Question

The Easter Challenge, as I understand it, doesn't require Christ to have a "dual nature" or anything of the like.

Simple question: How many women saw the empty tomb?

Matthew says two.
Mark says three.
Luke says three and then some.
John mentions only one.

If you were depicting this with actors, how many would you hire?
 
Old 04-17-2001, 05:25 PM   #5
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Post

&lt;&lt;It is only when we have finished the race that "all will be made clear."&gt;&gt;

How do you know this?

-T
 
Old 04-17-2001, 05:52 PM   #6
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Post

Quote:
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Grumpy:
The Easter Challenge, as I understand it, doesn't require Christ to have a "dual nature" or anything of the like.

Simple question: How many women saw the empty tomb?

Matthew says two.
Mark says three.
Luke says three and then some.
John mentions only one.

If you were depicting this with actors, how many would you hire?
</font>
But wait a second here, I am not the idiot to accept his premissess and try to justify his conclusion. I am suggesting that the entire event took place in the conscious mind of Joseph the carpenter and that the empty tomb was the birthplace and burial ground for the ego of Joseph who by means of rebirth became Jesus after John had prepared his way in the netherworld of the subconscious mind where John was reborn "of old." The different number of women reflect the different perspectives given by the authors and I can assure you that the reason for this can be justified from my perspective.

Next, I did no write that Christ had a dual nature but Jesus did while in purgatory (or purgatory by any other name) which was in the Gospels where he was purged from his second human identity.

If you want to be a literalist you would have a problem with Gen.1:1 and nothing more needs to be said.

Ams
 
Old 04-17-2001, 05:54 PM   #7
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Post

Quote:
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Thomas:
&lt;&lt;It is only when we have finished the race that "all will be made clear."&gt;&gt;

How do you know this?

-T
</font>
Because the end will be to have the mind of God. Many scriptures suggest this and to know the depth width and breadth of the Lord your God is to have the mind of God. If this was not in our reach why and how could we have knowledge thereoff?

Amos

 
Old 04-18-2001, 03:33 PM   #8
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Thumbs down

Quote:
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Amos123:
I am suggesting that the entire event took place in the conscious mind of Joseph the carpenter and that the empty tomb was the birthplace and burial ground for the ego of Joseph...
&lt;snip&gt;
If you want to be a literalist you would have a problem with Gen.1:1 and nothing more needs to be said.
</font>
I am not a Biblical literalist. Clearly, you are not either (hard to say what you are). In that case, Barker's Easter Challenge (assuming that's what you were talking about in the first place) is not intended for you. Barker devised it as a way to demonstrate to those who insist on Biblical inerrancy that their position is untenable. Since you've thrown literal inerrancy out the window (along with who knows what else), naturally the Challenge makes no sense.

Incidentally, if you were staging a play depicting Joseph's "ego burying" event, how many actors would you hire to play the empty tomb scene?
 
Old 04-18-2001, 10:08 PM   #9
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Post

Quote:
<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Incidentally, if you were staging a play depicting Joseph's "ego burying" event, how many actors would you hire to play the empty tomb scene?
Quote:
</font>
Sorry Grumpy I hope I did not imply that you were a literalist facing "the challence" in your own direction.

If I was to stage the burial event I would first ask you when it took place.

In Matthew Mary and Mary Magdalene were present. The reason why Mary theotokos was there is because she was to wait until the third day lest a premature resurrection would result in Jesus becomming the final imposter of Mt.27:64c. Had resurrection occured before the third day the entire event would have become a tragedy. Mary and John the Baptist were from the subconscious mind (Mary was 'woman' since "formation" in Gen 2, and beheaded John had returned there to be the silent player behind the scene).

In Mark Mary theotokos was there in several personifications because she is the queen of angels. The angels present were revelations personified after the Epiphany event had taken place. We can see them as the presents brought to Jesus by the Magi that were opened while at the shorelines of lake Galilea . . . which is the celestial sea in the land of the unknown (Galilea means unknown and the "shoreline" means bringing home form the sea). So Mark tells us about the foreshadow now become reality. Of course Mary Magdalene was also there.

In Luke the women were Jewish and were all convicted by the death of Jesus just as Mary Magdalene (the queen of fallen angels) was. These women were the fallen angels defeated by the angels in Mark. I have no knowledge of their names because I have never really studied this to say exactly who they were.

In John only Mary Magdalene was there because this was after the resurrection. Needless to say that Mary Magdalene would feel lost when the ego was gone as she was the cunning serpent that created the ego awareness. Magdalene was resident of the conscious mind and would be lost forever until raised as the symbol of destiny.

Amos

[This message has been edited by Amos123 (edited April 18, 2001).]
 
Old 04-19-2001, 06:53 PM   #10
Lance
Regular Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Overland Park, KS USA
Posts: 335
Post

Wow! I have to admit I've seen compartmentalization before to justify a believe in impossibility, but I think this one takes the cake.

What does the Russian judge say?
Lance is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 01:03 PM.

Top

This custom BB emulates vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2015, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.