Freethought & Rationalism Archive

ThinkingMan · 03-14-2008, 11:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gamera

Quote:

Originally Posted by EmpiricalGod

chrsitians call it righteous indignation!
It's basicly an excuse to still get pissed off, but claim it's to maintain respect for God. In other words, if someone treds on their beliefs, then it's a free ticket to sinless anger.

Whatever, Christians (like myself) don't see this as a conundrum about the nature of diviity. So half-life may have some point to make about theism in general, but not historical Christianity, which last time I looked the gospels were Christian texts by any standard.

You might want to reread John Kesler's post. The only interpretation that makes sense to me is that god's prophet was taking some liberties:

Quote:

Originally Posted by John Kesler

Leaving aside the issue of how an allegedly omniscient being can "change his mind," there is still the dilemma posed by chapter 33's statement that Yahweh wouldn't accompany the Israelites because he might destroy them. If his anger were righteous, and the outcome of that anger--destroying the Israelites--were justified, then why would Yahweh need to avoid accompanying the Israelites for fear of acting on that righteous anger? These verses seem to suggest that Yahweh knew that he wouldn't be able to control himself if he became angry, and that is a human weakness, with nothing "righteous" about it.

ThinkingMan · 03-14-2008, 11:17 PM

Also, on the subject of the donkey, Paul Carlson makes the case that Matthew fabricated this account. http://www.infidels.org/library/mode...adictions.html

Maybe someone could comment on the authenticity of the temple incident.

Toto · 03-15-2008, 02:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ThinkingMan

Also, on the subject of the donkey, Paul Carlson makes the case that Matthew fabricated this account. http://www.infidels.org/library/mode...adictions.html

Maybe someone could comment on the authenticity of the temple incident.

The Temple ruckus was historically impossible - the temple area was too big for one man with a whip to clear it out, and too well policed for someone to try that and survive - and it can be traced to the Hebrew Scriptures.

Seach for threads in this forum containing "ruckus" - such as:

Found: the OT source for Jesus' Temple Ruckus

Malachi151 · 03-15-2008, 06:43 AM

I think the main point here is that these are not "actions of Jesus", these are symbolic story elements devised by the author.

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

03-14-2008, 11:17 PM	#52
ThinkingMan Regular Member Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: Seattle Posts: 116	Also, on the subject of the donkey, Paul Carlson makes the case that Matthew fabricated this account. http://www.infidels.org/library/mode...adictions.html Maybe someone could comment on the authenticity of the temple incident.

03-15-2008, 06:43 AM	#54
Malachi151 Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2003 Location: Colorado Posts: 8,674	I think the main point here is that these are not "actions of Jesus", these are symbolic story elements devised by the author.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.