The Philosophy of Original Sin, Dissecting Genesis.

[Colter]

Well, since you don't have to rely upon the New Testament, for your knowledge of what Jesus said and did, and since, on the basis of your superior knowledge you know that the New Testament misrepresents Jesus, I must assume that you were an eye witness to the earthly ministry of Jesus.

No, but I did stay in a Holiday Inn Express last night.

 

[PsychoSarah]

That would make God both good and evil, double minded, two opposing wills.

I don't recall the bible ever stating god couldn't have evil moments.

 

[Colter]

I don't recall the bible ever stating god couldn't have evil moments.

Then that's not perfect.

 

[PsychoSarah]

Then that's not perfect.

Perfect is a rather subjective concept. What I consider to be the perfect day certainly would be different from what you could consider a perfect day

 

[Colter]

Perfect is a rather subjective concept. What I consider to be the perfect day certainly would be different from what you could consider a perfect day

The Heavenly Father is perfect always, he doesn't have good days and bad days. God can never do the ungodlike thing.

 

[Davian]

The Heavenly Father is perfect always, he doesn't have good days and bad days. God can never do the ungodlike thing.

The power of circular thinking. I was recently told by another Christian, genocide is fine, as it's only killing em early.

 

[GrowingSmaller]

Double Post

 

[GrowingSmaller]

A song for the thread

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=huOhqgYAKDY


In this song I think that the snake is associated with wisdom and sophia, i.e. man's knowledge and wisdon, the secular project. I got that general idea from a theosophist, who said that scientists are lucifarian "light bearers".

1 Corinthians 3:19 "The wisdom that wordly men esteem, is foolishness with God."

I know that philosophy is meant to be about unaided human reason, but to think symbolically at times is an art and literature. So the philosophy of aesthetics may be relevant, can allegory feed the imagination of an otherwise dry and perhaps dulling analytical project (not this thread, but the analytical tradition)?

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Read the words of Jesus BEFORE he was killed in the original gospels. They weren't teaching that Jesus was going to die as a sacrifice

.

Jesus often spoke of his coming sacrifice and death,

"And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up:

That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life." John 3:14-15

 

[Colter]

.

Jesus often spoke of his coming sacrifice and death,

"And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up:

That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life." John 3:14-15

Jesus never actually taught or spoke of his death as a sacrifice in exchange for Gods forgiveness of man. Sacrifice minded Jewish converts as well as the Pagans who merged with Paul's version of the gospel, just assumed that the cross was some sort of final sacrifice. God is changeless, loving and forgiving. He has always been that way.

 

[lesliedellow]

Jesus never actually taught or spoke of his death as a sacrifice in exchange for Gods forgiveness of man.

"And he took the cup, and gave thanks, and gave it to them, saying, Drink ye all of it; For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins." (Matt 26.27-28)

 

[Colter]

Hummm, so the absent landowner actually sent his only son to be rejected and killed so that now the landowner could finally forgive debts?

There was a certain landowner who planted a vineyard and set a hedge around it, dug a winepress in it and built a tower and he leased it to vinedressers and went into a far country. Now when vintage-time drew near, he sent his servants to the vinedressers, that they might receive its fruit and the vinedressers took his servants, beat one, killed one and stoned another. Again he sent other servants, more than the first and they did likewise to them. Then last of all he sent his son to them, saying, ‘They will respect my son.’ But when the vinedressers saw the son, they said among themselves, ‘This is the heir. Come, let us kill him and seize his inheritance.’ So they took him and cast him out of the vineyard and killed him. “Therefore, when the owner of the vineyard comes, what will he do to those vinedressers?” They said to Him, “He will destroy those wicked men miserably and lease his vineyard to other vinedressers who will render to him the fruits in their seasons.” ​

 

[lesliedellow]

Hummm, so the absent landowner actually sent his only son to be rejected and killed so that now the landowner could finally forgive debts?

There was a certain landowner who planted a vineyard and set a hedge around it, dug a winepress in it and built a tower and he leased it to vinedressers and went into a far country. Now when vintage-time drew near, he sent his servants to the vinedressers, that they might receive its fruit and the vinedressers took his servants, beat one, killed one and stoned another. Again he sent other servants, more than the first and they did likewise to them. Then last of all he sent his son to them, saying, ‘They will respect my son.’ But when the vinedressers saw the son, they said among themselves, ‘This is the heir. Come, let us kill him and seize his inheritance.’ So they took him and cast him out of the vineyard and killed him. “Therefore, when the owner of the vineyard comes, what will he do to those vinedressers?” They said to Him, “He will destroy those wicked men miserably and lease his vineyard to other vinedressers who will render to him the fruits in their seasons.” ​

It is a parable, and you are trying to make it say something it doesn't say. The point of the parable is the apostacy of the Jews over many centuries; not that that makes them in any way unique.

 

[Colter]

Was killing Jesus a sin?

 

[lesliedellow]

Was killing Jesus a sin?

Yes it was, but as the Bible makes abundantly clear, it was also something preordained by God.

 

[Colter]

Yes it was, but as the Bible makes abundantly clear, it was also something preordained by God.

If it was a Sin then it was NOT Gods will for Jesus to be rejected and killed as a sacrifice for the sins of mankind. But that's not to say that God didn't use the savage Pagan belief system and it's interpretation of the meaning of the death on the cross, to bring them salvation packaged in their own ignorance.

 

[lesliedellow]

If it was a Sin then it was NOT Gods will for Jesus to be rejected and killed as a sacrifice for the sins of mankind.

"And truly the Son of man goeth, as it was determined: but woe unto that man by whom he is betrayed!" (Luke 22.22)

Who determined it if not God? Who else has the ability to determine what will happen in the future?

 

[Colter]

"And truly the Son of man goeth, as it was determined: but woe unto that man by whom he is betrayed!" (Luke 22.22)

Who determined it if not God? Who else has the ability to determine what will happen in the future?

Jesus, the Son of God, did in fact know about his eventual rejection and death. He explained that he had the power to lay down his life and the power to take it up again. He told the pesky Jews to "tear down this temple and in three days I will raise it up again". He did just that. But the faith based salvation of his gospel had not been conditional to his death as some sort of sacrifice.

 

[lesliedellow]

Jesus, the Son of God, did in fact know about his eventual rejection and death. He explained that he had the power to lay down his life and the power to take it up again. He told the pesky Jews to "tear down this temple and in three days I will raise it up again". He did just that. But the faith based salvation of his gospel had not been conditional to his death as some sort of sacrifice.

Then why did God preordain it? Because the NT, including Jesus himself, says that he did so, and more than once does it say that.

 

[mmksparbud]

I've had to say this before--will try again--

The soul that sinneth--it shall die. Period. Sin can not live in the presence of a pure God. Death was the price that Adam and Eve had to pay for rejecting what God said and believing someone else--you shall not surely die--you shall be as God--God had said the opposite. Christ came to oay the price for sin--He paid it for all--for every sinner. His death was the only death that could pay for all sinners as He was sinless. When we stand before God and are judged, those who have accepted His death for their sins are forgiven--His blood paid the penalty.
Christ came as both fully divine and fully human. He did not use His divinity for Himself. He did not go "outside of His human body to bypass the pain"--He endured the pain, the beatings, the crucifixion--all felt--and more. He endured the death of each human ever born or ever would be born--We have no concept of what kind of suffering that entailed. His greatest pain, however, was the separation from God that bearing all sins caused. That is what made Him cry out--"My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me."--What He endured at that point, He endured on His human faith that He would be resurrected and be with His Father again. It is the same faith we must all have, that we will be resurrected one day also. He did not immediately on His death go to heaven--On His resurrection Mary came to the garden and He told her to not touch Him for He had not yet ascended to His Father. Later--He allowed Thomas to touch His wounds, so He obviously, in between Mary and Thomas, appeared to His Father. He was dead for those days--not in hell, not in heaven--dead. The penalty for sin is death--He paid it,it's a done deal, it just has to be accepted.
Christ paid the penalty--Satan will bear the blame when he and all his followers are thrown into the lake of fire where all sin and death itself will go and be utterly and completely destroyed.