FRDB Archives

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.


Go Back   FRDB Archives > Archives > Religion (Closed) > Biblical Criticism & History
Welcome, Peter Kirby.
You last visited: Yesterday at 03:12 PM

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 09-03-2009, 06:25 AM   #21
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: The Netherlands
Posts: 3,397
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by No Robots View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by dog-on View Post
Nah, it means that the Hebrews only knew the demiurge, unless Moses was a liar...
I don't know what you're on about, but since you mention Moses and his understanding of God:
Jahveh ehad, cried Moses: "Hear O Israel, Being is our God, Being is One" (Deut. 6:4).

Yet this quotation provides precisely the historically monstrous example of how Israel hears and how the truth is straightway transformed into superstition in Israel's ears. For this magnificent saying is at once a hymn of exultation and a wrathful protest against idol worship of any kind; but despite this protest, it now signifies—in the conception of Israel, the Jewish, Christian and Muslim Israel—the well-enough known, imbecilically wrong translation: "Hear O Israel, the Lord our god is the only God!" (Brunner, Spinoza gegen Kant, page 43). Moses said that thou shalt not make unto thee any image of this Jahveh, no imagination of it, i.e., it is that which cannot be thought as things are thought, as if it had the same sort of being as things—I am that I am (Ex. 3:14)! Jahveh, Being, is the term for the wholly abstract spiritual; it has no relation to the relative world. By Jahveh, the wholly great is meant. It means the same thing as Spinoza does in his great—his absolutely great expression, Ens constans infinitis attributis (Absolute Being with infinite attributes.) And Jahveh Tsebaot, Jahveh of infinite powers, is nothing but the mystical expression of the same thing as is expressed philosophically by Ens constans infinitis attributis. The whole tremendous concern of Judaism lies in this phrase Jahveh ehad [Ehad=one and only. Pronunciation; with a gutteral 'kh', accent on the second syllable], in that single word Jahveh, which was ultimately forbidden even to be pronounced, and to pronounce which was a deadly sin. The mystical primordial character of Judaism—so naturally mystical that the Jews, in spite of their having made Jahvism into religion, never established a mythology, even while their Jahveh always remained exalted as God over every god of other religions, so that other ancient civilizations did not recognize him as a god, and said the Jews were without religion and atheistic—the mystical primordial character of Judaism expressed itself in this, its ineffable holy word.—Constantin Brunner / Our Christ, p. 157-8.
Did Moses talk to a burning bush?

Maybe JC missed that part...
dog-on is offline  
Old 09-03-2009, 07:46 AM   #22
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Southwest USA
Posts: 4,093
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by aa5874 View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by No Robots View Post
If Christianity is to become what it wants to be, it must renounce the desire to know anything that pure Judaism in Christ neither knows nor wishes to know: it must renounce symbols, dogmas, articles of faith, liturgy, worship; it must want to know nothing of creation, the Fall, redemption and justification, heaven and hell, the incarnation of God, the Three Persons of the Godhead, the single Personality of God; it must not hold on to a single item of religion's superstition. If Christianity is to come about, Christ must be the Master, revealing to the heathen that they are but men (Ps. 9:21).--Constantin Brunner, Our Christ.
This passage is really meaningless.

If Christ of the NT is discarded, then Christ was nothing. How can Christ be the Master after having rejected him?
Is not Maximus Prime the Master of the AutoBots?

Since when does one have to be real to be a Master?
Tristan Scott is offline  
Old 09-03-2009, 08:03 AM   #23
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 5,679
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dog-on View Post
Did Moses talk to a burning bush?

Maybe JC missed that part...
[I]f Moses spoke with God face to face as a man speaks with his friend (i.e. by means of their two bodies) Christ communed with God mind to mind.--Spinoza, TTP.
No Robots is offline  
Old 09-03-2009, 08:09 AM   #24
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 5,679
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by aa5874 View Post
If Christ of the NT is discarded, then Christ was nothing. How can Christ be the Master after having rejected him?
It is your reading of the NT that I do not agree with. Essentially, you hold to the reading of traditional Christian religion, ie. that Christ is God. To this major premise you add the minor premise that God does not exist. This leads you to the conclusion that Christ does not exist. This is all perfectly logical. However, the premise that Christ is God has always been disputed. The official Church tried everything in its power to suppress the contention that Christ was only a man. The Church failed in this. Now, the Church position is taken up by mythologians. They, too, will fail.
No Robots is offline  
Old 09-03-2009, 08:55 AM   #25
Contributor
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: the fringe of the caribbean
Posts: 18,988
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Toto View Post

From The Restitution of Jesus Christ

Quote:
The Restitution of Jesus Christ (2008) may be the most formidable, comprehensive, well-researched, biblically in-depth book to ever challenge the church dogma that Jesus is God. Yet it affirms all other major church teachings about Jesus, including his virgin birth, sinlessness, miracles, atonement, resurrection, ascension, heavenly exaltation, and future return to establish his earthly kingdom. This book is based on a conservative view of the inspiration of the Bible. So, it affirms the historical integrity of its four gospels. They tell almost all we know about Jesus of Nazareth.
This is just a sales pitch.

It is far more ridiculous to claim Jesus was a man who was born of a virgin, resurrected, ascended to heaven and is coming back to earth a second time.

There are no corroborative sources of antiquity outside of apologetics that can show that there was such a man during the time of Tiberius and Pilate.

It should be obvious to the author of the 'Restitution of Jesus Christ' that the Jesus God/man story was plausible and believable in antiquity and that it was not necessary for Jesus to have existed at all whether as a God or a man.

Believers only want a believable story.

Neither Zeus nor Apollo needed to have existed to have been believed to have existed as Gods or that they had the ability to perform miracles.
aa5874 is offline  
Old 09-03-2009, 11:40 AM   #26
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Atlanta
Posts: 2,060
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by dog-on View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by No Robots View Post

I don't know what you're on about, but since you mention Moses and his understanding of God:
[I]Jahveh ehad[/I], cried Moses: "Hear O Israel, Being is our God, Being is One" (Deut. 6:4).

Yet this quotation provides precisely the historically monstrous example of how Israel hears and how the truth is straightway transformed into superstition in Israel's ears. For this magnificent saying is at once a hymn of exultation and a wrathful protest against idol worship of any kind; but despite this protest, it now signifies—in the conception of Israel, the Jewish, Christian and Muslim Israel—the well-enough known, imbecilically wrong translation: "Hear O Israel, the Lord our god is the only God!" (Brunner, Spinoza gegen Kant, page 43). Moses said that thou shalt not make unto thee any image of this Jahveh, no imagination of it, i.e., it is that which cannot be thought as things are thought, as if it had the same sort of being as things—I am that I am (Ex. 3:14)! Jahveh, Being, is the term for the wholly abstract spiritual; it has no relation to the relative world. By Jahveh, the wholly great is meant. It means the same thing as Spinoza does in his great—his absolutely great expression, Ens constans infinitis attributis (Absolute Being with infinite attributes.) And Jahveh Tsebaot, Jahveh of infinite powers, is nothing but the mystical expression of the same thing as is expressed philosophically by Ens constans infinitis attributis. The whole tremendous concern of Judaism lies in this phrase Jahveh ehad [Ehad=one and only. Pronunciation; with a gutteral 'kh', accent on the second syllable], in that single word Jahveh, which was ultimately forbidden even to be pronounced, and to pronounce which was a deadly sin. The mystical primordial character of Judaism—so naturally mystical that the Jews, in spite of their having made Jahvism into religion, never established a mythology, even while their Jahveh always remained exalted as God over every god of other religions, so that other ancient civilizations did not recognize him as a god, and said the Jews were without religion and atheistic—the mystical primordial character of Judaism expressed itself in this, its ineffable holy word.—Constantin Brunner / Our Christ, p. 157-8.
Did Moses talk to a burning bush?

Maybe JC missed that part...
:lol: Way to go dog-on!
jakejonesiv is offline  
Old 09-03-2009, 11:43 AM   #27
Contributor
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: the fringe of the caribbean
Posts: 18,988
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by No Robots View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by aa5874 View Post
If Christ of the NT is discarded, then Christ was nothing. How can Christ be the Master after having rejected him?
It is your reading of the NT that I do not agree with. Essentially, you hold to the reading of traditional Christian religion, ie. that Christ is God. To this major premise you add the minor premise that God does not exist. This leads you to the conclusion that Christ does not exist. This is all perfectly logical. However, the premise that Christ is God has always been disputed. The official Church tried everything in its power to suppress the contention that Christ was only a man. The Church failed in this. Now, the Church position is taken up by mythologians. They, too, will fail.
But, you have failed from the very start to show how Christ can be Master while rejecting his very character that makes him Master as described by the Church.

Now, it was the Church writers and the authors of the NT that presented a myth to the world, under the pretense of a God/man, and MJers only confirm the myth.

I can confirm that Jesus was described as a myth in Matthew 1.18 and Luke 1.35 where Jesus was described as the offspring of the Holy Ghost of God or in John 1 where he was described as the creator of the world.

In order to show that Jesus was only a man you need some corroborative or credible source of antiquity external of the Church. There is none.

The author of "The Restitution of Christ" is merely trying to sell his book with gimmicks. There is only one source where Jesus Christ was mentioned and they are all forgeries, Antiquities of the Jews 18.3.3. and 20.9.1.


If you propose that the Church traditionally presented Christ as a GOD, then they have in effect presented a myth.

Traditionally Gods are myths. Zeus and Apollo followed that tradition and they were not alone.

The proposal that Jesus was merely man has no support at all from sources of antiquity outside the Church, even almost all apocryphal writings, though rejected by the Church, claim Jesus was a God/man.

It must be universally accepted that if Jesus existed that he must have been human, but there can be found no evidence or corroborative source of antiquity that can show that Jesus did exist during the time of Tiberius and Pilate.
aa5874 is offline  
Old 09-03-2009, 12:25 PM   #28
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 5,679
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by aa5874 View Post
The proposal that Jesus was merely man has no support at all from sources of antiquity outside the Church, even almost all apocryphal writings, though rejected by the Church, claim Jesus was a God/man.
Cerinthus and the Ebionites asserted the Christ was just a man.
No Robots is offline  
Old 09-03-2009, 12:26 PM   #29
Veteran Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 5,679
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jakejonesiv View Post
:lol: Way to go dog-on!
No Robots is offline  
Old 09-03-2009, 05:45 PM   #30
Contributor
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: the fringe of the caribbean
Posts: 18,988
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by No Robots View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by aa5874 View Post
The proposal that Jesus was merely man has no support at all from sources of antiquity outside the Church, even almost all apocryphal writings, though rejected by the Church, claim Jesus was a God/man.
Cerinthus and the Ebionites asserted the Christ was just a man.
Those claims are NOT external of the Church. It was writers like Irenaeus in "Against Heresies" who made these claims about the Ebionites and Cerinthus. The historical veracity of the Church writers are questionable.

And when exactly did Cerinthus and the Ebionites make those claims?

About a hundred years after Jesus supposedly lived?

It must be noted that The Church writers made claims about Josephus that now seem false.

Please, I need information external of the Church about Cerinthus and the Ebionites.
aa5874 is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 03:54 AM.

Top

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