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: Today at 03:12 PM

 
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 11-20-2011, 12:35 PM   #1
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Alberta
Posts: 11,885
Default Chili split from Son of Man Son of God and other threads

Quote:
Originally Posted by aa5874 View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Adam View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Littlejohn View Post
.
Son of Man and Son of God: have, these locutions, the same meaning as regards the historical figure of Jesus of Nazareth?...

Greetings
Littlejohn
It's an open question. See Paul Owen's book review in the Jan. 2009 Review of Biblical Literature, of Maurice Casey's The Solution to the Son of Man Problem.
http://www.bookreviews.org/pdf/6442_6959.pdf
(Thanks to Toto for finding the link.)
Casey recognizes only the Synoptics as authentic, and he does not find divine allusions in the term "son of man". Paul Owens disputes that.
I see the general picture as widespread use of "son of man" in the Synoptics paralleled by widespread use of "son of god" in gJohn. In gJohn "son of man" is occasionally used, however, usually with divine implications. The term "son of god" is also used occasionally in the Synoptics.
The phrase "Son of Man" is allegory in the Synoptics.

Jesus was FATHERED by a Holy Ghost in gMatthew and gLuke.

Matthew 1:18 -
Quote:
Now the birth of Jesus Christ was on this wise, .... his mother......was found with child of the Holy Ghost.
Luke 1:35 -
Quote:
And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God.
There is ZERO evidence that the Synoptics are historical accounts of a man. It is WRITTEN, not presumed, that Jesus was FATHERED by a Ghost.

We are NOT dealing with history in the Synoptics. We are dealing with Myth Fables that people of antiquity BELIEVED.

In antiquity It was CIRCULATED PUBLICLY and PREACHED that Jesus was FATHERED by a Holy Ghost.

People of antiquity and even today BELIEVE ALL SORTS of Myth Fables about Jesus or Gods.

Some Christians BELIEVED the MYTH Fable of Marcion that the Son of God was a PHANTOM with ZERO birth and ZERO flesh but came directly to Capernaum from heaven in the 15th year of reign of Tiberius.
But 'begotten' does not equal 'fathered' and if Jesus was sinless he was also not human nor his mother could be, and so 'fathering' as you know it is not what this is about. So we already are talking about two different things here and no more needs to be said except maybe that your way if thinking was at one time called 'humping a goat', only to say that you are 'thinking with a split mind' . . . and that for neither Mary or Jesus was true.
Chili is offline  
Old 11-20-2011, 12:53 PM   #2
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Alberta
Posts: 11,885
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Littlejohn View Post
.

Son of Man and Son of God: have, these locutions, the same meaning as regards the historical figure of Jesus of Nazareth?...


Greetings


Littlejohn

.
In my definition of Son of Man we are reborn from above and we are Son of man from below and all humans are Son of God and so with the potential of realization = basically good and redeemable as such (including females in sonship to make known that God is Truth as first cause).
Chili is offline  
Old 11-21-2011, 05:52 AM   #3
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Alberta
Posts: 11,885
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by aa5874 View Post
The claim that Jesus died for our sins is ABSOLUTE Fiction.
Sorry sir but you have Christ and Jesus mixed up to say that while we are sinner Christ is dead in us and so we are sleepers as sinner in the chapter called "Faith, Hope and Love" of Romans 5 and so one must be dead before Jesus can do his thing in us and have been reconciled (called to order) and will be saved by his life as a modal to follow.
Chili is offline  
Old 11-22-2011, 05:13 AM   #4
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Alberta
Posts: 11,885
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chili View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Littlejohn View Post
.

Son of Man and Son of God: have, these locutions, the same meaning as regards the historical figure of Jesus of Nazareth?...


Greetings


Littlejohn

.
In my definition of Son of Man we are reborn from above and we are Son of man from below and all humans are Son of God and so with the potential of realization = basically good and redeemable as such (including females in sonship to make known that God is Truth as first cause).
. . . let me add that the difference between Son of Man and Son of man is pivotal upon the Annunciation wherein 'with consent' we will be Son of Man and 'without consent' Son of man to show worthiness to receive, or not, and so will remain either as the child that is to become father of man, or not, with the difference being only that Son of Man is born from a barren womb [upon high] and Son of man is from his mothers womb untimely ripped and thus not worthy to receive and hence never will find atonement with God to remain lost in the desert below as Son of man who, while spiritually empowered, will remain twin in the yoke of slavery and sin (and I wish such as the likes of Billy Graham would known this too).

Now note please that as Son of God in the flesh our utimate destiny is unity with God of the flesh wherein the essence of our existence was first created, which so will be 'home for us' and is where our very own lineage must come to a full stop to have peace on earth and so truly know who we are. To this end a foreshadow is given in the precondition "to love the Lord your God with all your heart, soul and mind" so it may go well with you (instead of spreading the good news on earth by inference here).

Now watch closely as 'Lamb of God' and 'Child of Israel' is equal in origination wherefore then also Jerusalem and the New Jerusalem (on high) will be the same and so Israel a state of mind without a home except in us as Lamb of God in John to call us home to Rome instead of Israel which never was a place on earth, nor was it meant to be or it would have been already then. I.E. the same 'trunk of faith' in origination must find the same end in the end and since we share this point of origination with the Jews it is inevitable that Rome will also be home for them . . . and not because I say so here.
Chili is offline  
Old 11-22-2011, 05:29 AM   #5
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Alberta
Posts: 11,885
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by tanya View Post
[Further, why, if he had been mortal to begin with, and a mere human, not a divine entity, would he return to earth, three days after his "death", (or was it two days?) as ANOTHER human? This was, post crucifixion, definitely a divine creature, correct? Humans don't return to life after death, that is a bit of magic that only divine creatures can perform. So, how then, could Jesus have invited Thomas to insert his hand into the spear wound? Do you mean to suggest that the resurrected Jesus, who died for our sins, reappeared, post mortem, adopting the same physical shape as his human predecessor?

It is because so called crucifixion describes the physical component wherein all the senses are re-routed from the TOK to the TOL and conventional words must be used to describe the event since there is no convention to be found in the TOL or there would be temples there as well. It so is called allegory wherein truth is real and much more so than in temples down below.

Point in fact to say is that "dead is dead" Tanya dear.

. . . and so all senses must be pierced so that sanity can return or there would be pain in heaven still and we sing patient endurance songs to quench the knawing pain that we would rather not know.
Chili is offline  
Old 11-22-2011, 07:37 AM   #6
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Alberta
Posts: 11,885
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by aa5874 View Post
[ It is ABSOLUTE FICTION that a MAN died for our sins when Paul ADMITTED he and OVER 500 people SAW the man ALIVE AFTER he was supposed to be dead.

It should be obvious and LOGICAL that while Paul was claiming the man DIED for our Sins that the Man could still be ALIVE and was being WITNESSED by other people.
You need to be careful and consider that Paul here saw the essence of Jesus at his own 'royal wedding' banquet and from the inivited guests 500 were in attendance and they saw it too. They so belonged to his Alpha as invited to attend for which Zechariah set the table.
Chili is offline  
Old 11-22-2011, 09:41 AM   #7
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Alberta
Posts: 11,885
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by semiopen View Post
One of the problems in religious Judaism is that the patriarchs are said to be perfect (at least following the commandments) when this just isn't true.

From Chabad -

Did Abraham Serve His Guests Non-Kosher?

Quote:
A careful look at the verse shows that Abraham did not actually dine with his guests. Rather, he served the butter, milk, and meat to people whom he believed to be traveling gentiles (there were no other Jews back then), and were obviously under no dietary obligations. Abraham saw no reason that his personal stringencies should diminish the enjoyment of his guests.3
Pretty flimsy, an alternate explanation is also flimsy but at least makes some sense -

Quote:
Some commentaries point out that the verse indicates that Abraham first served dairy and then the meat.6
Of course, Abraham is fucking sister Sarah at this time (when he's not selling her to Pharoah) so the whole following the commandments position is bizarre.
Yes but if 'social taboos' are the heart of each and every mythology who are you going to fuck beside you sister since orgies were quite normal way back then, and to make butter milk and honey the forbidden fruit sound much more effective than turnips . . . or at least it does to me.
Chili is offline  
Old 11-22-2011, 11:11 AM   #8
Banned
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Indianapolis
Posts: 2,366
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Chili View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by aa5874 View Post
[ It is ABSOLUTE FICTION that a MAN died for our sins when Paul ADMITTED he and OVER 500 people SAW the man ALIVE AFTER he was supposed to be dead.

It should be obvious and LOGICAL that while Paul was claiming the man DIED for our Sins that the Man could still be ALIVE and was being WITNESSED by other people.
You need to be careful and consider that Paul here saw the essence of Jesus at his own 'royal wedding' banquet and from the inivited guests 500 were in attendance and they saw it too. They so belonged to his Alpha as invited to attend for which Zechariah set the table.
Man, I bet the caterers hate it when those uninvited essences show up at weddings!
Dogfish is offline  
Old 11-22-2011, 11:56 AM   #9
J-D
Moderator - General Religious Discussions
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: New South Wales
Posts: 27,330
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dogfish View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chili View Post
Quote:
Originally Posted by aa5874 View Post
[ It is ABSOLUTE FICTION that a MAN died for our sins when Paul ADMITTED he and OVER 500 people SAW the man ALIVE AFTER he was supposed to be dead.

It should be obvious and LOGICAL that while Paul was claiming the man DIED for our Sins that the Man could still be ALIVE and was being WITNESSED by other people.
You need to be careful and consider that Paul here saw the essence of Jesus at his own 'royal wedding' banquet and from the inivited guests 500 were in attendance and they saw it too. They so belonged to his Alpha as invited to attend for which Zechariah set the table.
Man, I bet the caterers hate it when those uninvited essences show up at weddings!
Nah, they just serve them more Chili.
J-D is offline  
Old 11-22-2011, 02:26 PM   #10
Banned
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Alberta
Posts: 11,885
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by J-D View Post
Nah, they just serve them more Chili.
Lots of Chili here as that is where he was introduced to the thousand year reign of God, or should I say as God or better perhaps Lord God and God if he got his stuff direct from God as he said he did, but I am not sure where.
Chili is offline  
 

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -8. The time now is 05:28 PM.

Top

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