Freethought & Rationalism Archive

River · 06-17-2004, 05:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Magdlyn

They didn't "go" anywhere. He never existed. He didn't have a childhood and young adulthood. All that mattered to Paul was his death and resurrection and humanity's opportunity to die and resurrect with him.

I wouldn't say that " Jesus" didn't exist. Perhaps the Biblical " Jesus" didn't exist. The Quran mentions that Isa Masih was a human and not the "Son of G-d" and that he preached the message of " Equilibrium" ...he spoke from the Cradle when he was an infant and made birds out of clay during his youth....The Quran also denies the genealogies found in the Bible for "Jesus Christ"....

Some of these accounts of Isa Masih (pbuh) are also found in the Gospel of Thomas.

---River

Magdlyn · 06-17-2004, 05:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by River

that he preached the message of " Equilibrium" ...he spoke from the Cradle when he was an infant and made birds out of clay during his youth....The Quran also denies the genealogies found in the Bible for "Jesus Christ"....

Some of these accounts of Isa Masih (pbuh) are also found in the Gospel of Thomas.

You mean the Infancy Gospel of Thomas. The Protevangelium of James also has childhood stories.

River · 06-17-2004, 05:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Magdlyn

You mean the Infancy Gospel of Thomas. The Protevangelium of James also has childhood stories.

Some of the childhood stories are similar to whats presented in the Quran but not all....However, I've read one story..a really weird one ( Was it the Infancy Gospel of Thomas?) that stated that Jesus was playing with his friends and he got pissed that he was losing a game so he killed the kid with his supernatural abilities ( please correct me If I'm wrong).....

---River

fallingblood · 06-17-2004, 06:05 PM

River- I read that two, I'm pretty sure it is in the Gospel of Thomas.

I think the Quran has a better discription of Jesus. The Quran says that Jesus was born, but they do not say she was a virgin or that his conception was due to the cause of anything special. They also say that he isn't crucified.

Toto · 06-17-2004, 06:37 PM

My impression was that Islam accepts the Virgin Mary, even though they believe that Jesus was human and escaped crucifixion.

Comparison between gospels, Koran

Quote:

"Behold! the angels said: "O Mary! Allah has chosen you and purified you - chosen you above the women of all nations."
Quran 3:42.

"Behold! the angels said: "O Mary! Allah gives you glad tidings of a Word from Him: his name will be Christ Jesus, the son of Mary, held in honor in this world and the Hereafter and of (the company of) those nearest to Allah";
Quran 3:45

"She said: 'O my Lord! how shall I have a son when no man has touched me?' He said: "Even so: Allah creates what He wills: when He has decreed a Plan, He but says to it, 'Be,' and it is!"
Quran 3:47

It is assumed that Islam incorporated the doctrines of some of the heretical sects of Christianity.

fallingblood · 06-17-2004, 06:47 PM

Toto- But it never says that she gets pregnant through the holy spirit or from some supernatural way.

Quote:

"She said: 'O my Lord! how shall I have a son when no man has touched me?' He said: "Even so: Allah creates what He wills: when He has decreed a Plan, He but says to it, 'Be,' and it is!"
Quran 3:47

All that it says is that she wasn't touched by a man at that time. She wasn't pregnant though.

CX · 06-17-2004, 11:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by fallingblood

I still think its wrong.

What's wrong? The translation? The word means stabbed or pierced. It's pretty noncontroversial. Now whether the narrative is coherent at this juncture is another point entirely.

fallingblood · 06-18-2004, 03:41 PM

CX- You are right. I just didn't want to except that fact. But I still don't think he died. I mean how can you explain those herbs that they brought to Jesus after the crucifixation? They were used to healing, not burial.

Magdlyn · 06-18-2004, 07:20 PM

fallingblood, you said:

"the medical packing using the huge amounts of herbs (aloe and myrrh, both were well known healing herbs and had no part in a burial)"

and:

"I mean how can you explain those herbs that they brought to Jesus after the crucifixation?"

From this site I read,

http://ww2.netnitco.net/users/legend01/myrrh.htm

Quote:

Myrrh was used in the embalming or anointing of the dead, it came to represent mortality, suffering, and sorrow. The Israelites used perfumed ointments of myrrh in their funeral preparations to postpone the decay and alleviate the odors of the deceased. Although less than one pound was normally used in Israelite funerary preparations, Nicodemus brought "a mixture of myrrh and aloes, about a hundred pounds" to prepare Jesus's body for burial (John 19:39). This was to show his respect for Christ. Other people burned myrrh as an incense during cremations.

and:

Quote:

Until the invention of morphine and other modern painkillers, myrrh was a common analgesic. In ancient times it was often mixed with wine to make the drink more potent (Clarke's Commentary - Prov 9:4-5). As was the custom among the Jews, Christ was offered "wine mingled with myrrh" to ease the pains of the cross. However, He refused to drink it (Mk 15:23).

From many sources, I read that aloe was used by the Egyptians and for millenia afterwards, as an embalming ingredient, for its antibacterial properties. Ie:

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/nhne/message/32

Quote:

In 1697, an Italian surgeon left a list of 27 powdered herbs and drugs that he hademployed to preserve the body of Saint Gregorio Barbarigo. Myrrh, aloes, and frankincense, another favored Egyptian resin, headed the list.

beanpie · 06-19-2004, 02:52 PM

Quote:

From the example of Plotinus, who himself had been merely promoting the very popular ideas of Plato, it is seen that the trinitarian expression of a Father, Son/Logos, and Holy Spirit, already had its ancient correspondence to the Platonic Supreme, Nous, and Psyche (Soul). This, in turn, had had its even more ancient correspondence to the Men-nafr conception of Ptah, Haru (Mind), and Djhwty (Word) which had been developed for the express purpose of expressing all previous gods as one. Whereas some philosophers had collapsed the aspects of Haru and Djhwty into the Logos, others had maintained the triune distinction in the form of the Nous and the Psyche. Though adopting the concept of the Logos, Xristianity nevertheless had gone on to embrace the triune conception of the Hellenistic godhead tradition by asserting that God was three persons of one divine essence. The result of such an assertion is that a god is not equivalent to being a divine person but is essentially a divine essence through which more than one person can be expressed. Not even the Men-nafr conception of Ptah had denied the multiplicity of the natjuraw (gods) expressed by it. Thus, the trinitarian doctrine is based on the denial of a conceptual fact universally recognized by theistic peoples throughout time, namely that; a god is a divine person. It doesn’t matter whether or not divine persons are said to share in a common essence; a doctrine of three divine persons is a doctrine of three gods (polytheism) and a doctrine of two divine persons is a doctrine of two gods. As the recognition of the definition of a god had existed ages before the birth of Xristianity, there is no honest basis for a Xristian to attempt to redefine the meaning of the term "god" by asserting a god as being anything other than a divine person. To assert such is to consciously assert a lie. Thus, the doctrine of the trinity is simply a lie formulated to avoid the obvious recognition of Xristian polytheism ultimately preserving the triadic Roman worship of Iupiter (The Heavenly Father), Mars (The Conquering Son), and Quirinus (The Holy One). Furthermore, the conception of the divine persona ascribed to the Xristian Logos is the conception of a new god literally being worshipped before Yhwh (John 14:6, Romans 1:8). A particular biblical response to ancient YisraEl is apparently just as appropriate to Xristian polytheism.

http://www.geocities.com/djahuti.geo/TheLogos.htm

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

06-17-2004, 06:05 PM	#64
fallingblood Junior Member Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Mandan, ND Posts: 80	River- I read that two, I'm pretty sure it is in the Gospel of Thomas. I think the Quran has a better discription of Jesus. The Quran says that Jesus was born, but they do not say she was a virgin or that his conception was due to the cause of anything special. They also say that he isn't crucified.

06-18-2004, 03:41 PM	#68
fallingblood Junior Member Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: Mandan, ND Posts: 80	CX- You are right. I just didn't want to except that fact. But I still don't think he died. I mean how can you explain those herbs that they brought to Jesus after the crucifixation? They were used to healing, not burial.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.