intricatic
...a dinosaur... or something...
From reading the rest of your reply, I find this hard to believe.
Politics are a self-destructive system. Every government in history has fallen and been replaced by other governments. This is the way of the world. I wouldn't put any faith in such a temporal and meaningless thing.
Yes. I believe the differences far outweigh any similarities. Plagiarism would be very unreasonable given the cultural context that this took place in. Israel was a fairly isolated nation.
I'd think they'd need a lot more collaborating evidence to support such an idea than commonalities in the teachings. As I said, it's an antitype of what Christ fulfilled. Which you also acknowledge further in this reply.Why do you think I don't believe the sermon should be followed?
I don't believe in a subjectivist view of scripture, or the world in general, but I do very much believe in the concepts expounded on within this piece of scripture. This is something that's manifest itself in my life, as well, and I'm entirely glad it has. I don't, however, believe that it's a key to salvation in itself, as that would also imply that salvation is strictly a humanist endeavor, as well as implying that Christ didn't literally rise from the dead and ascend into Heaven. Of course, without the divinity of Christ, we run into issues pertaining to the entire essence of Christianity. This is what makes the problem real - humanism would seek to impose a strictly secular and "unmythical" understanding of life, one that denies that God is sitting on His throne waiting for the time of Judgement, and that Christ was merely another Buddha teaching wonderful moral conduct, but not much else. Existentialism demands it, as it also demands that mankind is isolated and alone in the universe, and the only thing that matters is love for one another. Christianity is far more than just love for one another, though. Also, the concept of love that we take this to mean is far different than the cultural understanding of the term in the time that it was given. Thus, our own idea of swayed philosophical interpretations are flawed to begin with. This is why people make strange claims regarding homosexuality being expressed in the Bible whenever they see an example of two men expressing joy and love for one another as brothers. We don't have that in our society because we have a false dichotomy regarding sexuality in place which alienates men from other men, and presumedly only allows women to express such affection for one another without it being sexual. This is a shame for Western culture in the truest sense of the word.
He did so because He was God's Son. Buddha was just some guy in Asia who had some interesting ideas, but ultimately fell into a primitive form of existentialism. The primary difference between Christ and Buddha was that Buddha taught the world was utterly meaningless and impossible to understand, thus being one with all perspectives is the greatest enlightenment one can attain, while Christ taught that God was the central meaning behind all of reality, and that He was in God, and God was in Him. Thus the Tao breaks apart into a thousand pieces, there is a central function of all things, and a central source of all things, and it is highly rational, highly logical, beyond all understanding, while at the same time, so simple that even a child can understand it. He's laid out in scripture for us to either accept or reject, and history teaches us that no matter how much hatred and despair, love and hope, bitterness and envy might arise from this fact, it will not go away. Neither will mankind's corrupt and sinful nature.
Despite whether you can see historic philosophical evolution or not, this is, in fact, what's affecting you. Experience is the central foundation of existentialism. You are, in an important part, correct here that the sermon on the mount will offer some insights into how to handle most situations, and offer a mode of living that's very much worthy of praise. At the same time, it cannot be isolated from the rest of Christ's accomplishments without destroying the very fabric of what Christianity is. I never said people who are following the sermon are evil, just sometimes blinded to the rest of scripture, and thus guided into an overly humanized and individual-centered understanding of Christ's work. At least, this seems to be the reason that existentialists for the last one hundred years have clung to it while rejecting large portions of the Bible. Experience is more important than all that sin and virtue, good and evil nonsense. Not to mention, the rest of the gospels explicates Christ as Divine - what with all those miracles He performs. This proves a problem because if we view Christ as divine, then man is not the most important facet of the world. There's something higher, and far more important than our petty politics and trite quabbles over ideas. God's word stands forever. Just as God stands forever. This isn't a statement of potential, this is a statement of absolute;
Isaiah 40
6 The voice said, Cry out!
And he said, What shall I cry?
All flesh is grass,
And all its loveliness is like the flower of the field.
7 The grass withers, the flower fades,
Because the breath of the LORD blows upon it;
Surely the people are grass.
8 The grass withers, the flower fades,
But the word of our God stands forever.
-----
6 The voice said, Cry out!
And he said, What shall I cry?
All flesh is grass,
And all its loveliness is like the flower of the field.
7 The grass withers, the flower fades,
Because the breath of the LORD blows upon it;
Surely the people are grass.
8 The grass withers, the flower fades,
But the word of our God stands forever.
-----
This, from the same prophet whom gave us prophecies of Christ's coming, and what His purpose would be;
Isaiah 49
6 Indeed He says,
It is too small a thing that You should be My Servant
To raise up the tribes of Jacob,
And to restore the preserved ones of Israel;
I will also give You as a light to the Gentiles,
That You should be My salvation to the ends of the earth.
7 Thus says the LORD,
The Redeemer of Israel, their Holy One,
To Him whom man despises,
To Him whom the nation abhors,
To the Servant of rulers:
Kings shall see and arise,
Princes also shall worship,
Because of the LORD who is faithful,
The Holy One of Israel;
And He has chosen You.
-----
6 Indeed He says,
It is too small a thing that You should be My Servant
To raise up the tribes of Jacob,
And to restore the preserved ones of Israel;
I will also give You as a light to the Gentiles,
That You should be My salvation to the ends of the earth.
7 Thus says the LORD,
The Redeemer of Israel, their Holy One,
To Him whom man despises,
To Him whom the nation abhors,
To the Servant of rulers:
Kings shall see and arise,
Princes also shall worship,
Because of the LORD who is faithful,
The Holy One of Israel;
And He has chosen You.
-----
I would have to wonder if this is one of those impossible and improbable things that regular people who've never experienced any supernatural phenomena should consider meaningless? Or is Isaiah really talking about Christ in this passage, generations before Christ was even born?
This is the best way to know what they mean. You sound as if you know what you're talking about, and I'm sure you agree with James regarding what pure and undefiled religion is. But what do you consider remaining spotless to the world to mean? This is a rewording of many of Christ's lessons. I respect the fact that you do seem to be strong in your faith, and this is very good, but do you believe strongly enough to take the Bible to mean what it says?
I don't quite get where you keep getting this idea that people don't follow the sermon literally and ignore it. As I've stated previously, this is a big, and very popular topic in almost all denominations of Christianity. It explicates the nature of the change that should take place when accepting Christ. Thus, it's vitally important to understand for what it is. However, this discussion is still about homosexuality and sin. What does sin mean to you? Does it exist?
Indeed, our nature is very contrary to such a thing. Could you stop, see your family killed, and then turn around and tell the people responsible that you love them despite taking your family from you? This requires something far more than humanism to do.
What version am I presenting? It's not men of reason, as has obviously been demonstrated time and again, that argue with the message that's clearly laid out in sccripture. It's men who center on emotions and humanism to define their worldview. Reason is an afterthought.
Do they? History still speaks exactly the reverse. If you disbelieve, take a look at the existential trends in the past, and how they've always died down, to be reborn again in a new and seemingly novel way, while the same interpretation of the Bible has remained fairly consistent throughout. The only changes come in reaction to existential assault - and usually are not drastic as relates to doctrine.
Why, though? Is it really an identity just as race is? Or is it a sexuality?
How can the two be the same? One is about a choice of lifestyle, and a choice of sexual preference that becomes reinforced and seemingly permanent, while the other is completely static. I would think the same thing I think now. If it was demonstrated that it cannot be reversed, or that it has such a massive impact on a person's ability to chose who to be attracted to that they have no choice, I would wonder whether the science itself has any idea what kind of changes happen to the human body over time, and whether this has any implications on sexual preferences. I would also wonder whether there was a political adgenda motivating the entire study. One thing I've learned, anything that has to do with politics is almost certain to be corrupt and deceitful.
Yes. Because it is a sin. Just the same as swearing, murder, lying, bribery, forgery, hatred, envy, gluttony, pedophilia, zoophilia, adultery, and prostitution are also sins. Some of those things are not victimizing, and are of themselves enslaving - those things I will always treat with the upmost compassion. Other sins are far worse because they do far more damage to innocent bystandards. Those things, while still loving the individual, I will seek justice to be done. Homosexuality does not fall into this second category.
Upvote
0
I never said otherwise, if you look.
