Why do Christians believe in Jesus when He's NOWHERE in the Hebrew Bible?

Cypress said:
Being the opposite of Jesus' example is a curious admission.

Just knowing right from wrong isn't enough. Moral excellence and virtue have to be studiously cultivated over the course of a lifetime. That is the lesson of history's great sages and prophets.
Click to expand...

Isn't The Reaper the opposite of the Sower?
 
Cypress said:
No, the behaviors did not come to them naturally and easily. That's why they devoted their lives to thinking about how to cultivate and nurture them, while teaching others how to do the same.

I agree with you that these sages and prophets thought up these virtues in their minds. But putting it into practice takes concentration, education, meditation. Knowing right from wrong is not enough. Otherwise, I don't think they would have been teachers. Every human should just naturally be inclined to moral excellence without even thinking about it.

That's my two cents anyway
Click to expand...

Not in this world!
 
I AM said:
That's not my definition, and Jesus wasn't a prophet he is the living son of God the Messiah.
Click to expand...

May I ask how you came to that conclusion? Because many of the earliest Christian churches fought over Jesus' relationship with God. Was he of the same essence? Was he fully human?

In fact the reason why the STANDARD today is one in which Jesus is of the same essence as God is because of the Nicene Council and the anathematization of the heresy of Arius. That's pretty standard issue "organized religion" right there.

So I'm curious how the revelation you got fleshed out and pointed to the actual TRUTH. Did the Council of Nicaea get it right? Or were the followers of Arius or any other number of dualist theologians all wrong? What was the communication you got that delineated this?
 
I AM said:
It's a guy doing his job.
Click to expand...

Still dodging the question, eh? It is troubling when one anoints themselves a reaper and then won't tell anyone what that actually means other than opaque references to a parable.

Is this one of those special cases when God tells you to hide information so that "reaping" can happen?
 
Cypress said:
No, the behaviors did not come to them naturally and easily. That's why they devoted their lives to thinking about how to cultivate and nurture them, while teaching others how to do the same.

I agree with you that these sages and prophets thought up these virtues in their minds. But putting it into practice takes concentration, education, meditation. Knowing right from wrong is not enough. Otherwise, I don't think they would have been teachers. Every human should just naturally be inclined to moral excellence without even thinking about it.

That's my two cents anyway
Click to expand...
Then we definitely will have to agree to disagree.
 
Perry Phimosis said:
Still dodging the question, eh? It is troubling when one anoints themselves a reaper and then won't tell anyone what that actually means other than opaque references to a parable.

Is this one of those special cases when God tells you to hide information so that "reaping" can happen?
Click to expand...

I definitely don't show all my cards
 
Perry Phimosis said:
May I ask how you came to that conclusion? Because many of the earliest Christian churches fought over Jesus' relationship with God. Was he of the same essence? Was he fully human?

In fact the reason why the STANDARD today is one in which Jesus is of the same essence as God is because of the Nicene Council and the anathematization of the heresy of Arius. That's pretty standard issue "organized religion" right there.

So I'm curious how the revelation you got fleshed out and pointed to the actual TRUTH. Did the Council of Nicaea get it right? Or were the followers of Arius or any other number of dualist theologians all wrong? What was the communication you got that delineated this?
Click to expand...

"Before Abraham I AM"
 
Phantasmal said:
So, it didn’t come naturally to these thinkers? Do you believe they were divinely inspired? I’m sure there were other great thinkers, it is just that some teachings and writings survived the test of time, while others did not.
Click to expand...

I forgot to answer and say I don't think they were divinely inspired, and I don't think I wrote any post saying that. There's no proof of that.

I am looking at religious traditions historically
 
Dutch Uncle said:
Agreed. Failure is a lesson in what not to do. I always liked the advice often attributed to Eleanor Roosevelt: "Learn from the mistakes of others, since you'll never live long enough to make them all on your own".

An example would be after all the classified material was found at Pedo Don's residence. Every smart politician should have learned to go through all of their papers to make sure they were clean.
Click to expand...

Siddhartha Gautama went through a series of spiritual failures before he gained enlightenment by settling on the middle way.
 
BidenPresident said:
Cypress is a religious fundamentalist.
Click to expand...
Maybe your education level is to low to understand that religion can be acknowledged as historically, socially, and culturally important to the human experience while still being agnostic about belief in a deity.

Those two positions are not mutually exclusive.
 
What does "God is dead" mean?

Philosophy had shown that governments no longer needed to be organized around the idea of divine right to be legitimate, but rather by the consent or rationality of the governed — that large and consistent moral theories could exist without reference to God. Europe no longer needed God as the source for all morality, value, or order in the universe; philosophy and science were capable of doing that for us. This increasing secularization of thought in the West led the philosopher to realize that not only was God dead but also that human beings had killed him with their scientific revolution, their desire to better understand the world.

https://bigthink.com/thinking/what-nietzsche-really-meant-by-god-is-dead/
 
Cypress said:
Maybe your education level is to low to understand that religion can be acknowledged as historically, socially, and culturally important to the human experience while still being agnostic about belief in a deity.

Those two positions are not mutually exclusive.
Click to expand...

I have found that often people forget that even if one is an atheist, as I am, one can still enjoy a discussion of theology. For me theology has always been something that _should_ follow logical rules and as such can be discussed dispassionately without belief in the diety.

People discuss Zeus and Greek mythology all the time without actually believing that Zeus exists on Mt. Olympus.

I was fortunate in my undergrad years to have had a close friend who was a philosophy major so I got to be exposed to all manner of ridiculously wild philosophical conversations for years. It was so much fun! We debated everything...even things we both didn't believe in.

I feel some degree of sorrow for those people who cannot understand this type of entertainment.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top