Why did Jesus Leave?

[yeshuaslavejeff]

Pretend this is a philosophy forum and someone made a thread asking a question.

And remember, the premise, the ops question,
may be null and void - assuming facts not in evidence today.
Thus, any answer that is based upon thinking the title/ op/ question is valid,
may be vain (empty) also......
"pretend" if that's the right word .....

 

[HitchSlap]

Then, you will.

I already do.

 

[HitchSlap]

By the root definition of the word ("objective"), if there were objective evidence - it wouldn't be evidence.

In order for evidence of the spiritual world to be evidence...it must be spiritual.

So fake answers to false assertions.

Got it.

 

[2PhiloVoid]

I think it's a valid question from a position of any given skeptic.

I really don't buy the oversimplified answers like "If he didn't leave then Holy Spirit wouldn't come", Or "He left because the mission to spread the Gospel had to be fulfilled", or to "Prepare a place", again neither make a lot of sense in a scope what Christianity is and what it expects.

The question is whether this world is better if Jesus is there for all to be able to experience apart from some "feeling" or a book narrative? It wouldn't make Christianity to be so doubtable. Every Thomas out there could visit a 2000 year old dude with holes in his hands and believe.

Why leave without a trace, and except leave the world with a story and a promise of hope.

It seems like a good excuse to mask the reason as to why Jesus is not here. "Well, he was here, but you've missed him by about 2000 years, BUT he's coming back soon... so just wait and read this book about him".

Perhaps there are other reasonable explanations, but what would these be? What do you think?

Well...............one central premise in the Bible is, surprisingly, that people don't always believe....even with a preponderance of (direct) evidence. Another central premise is that the human heart is prone to sin regardless of God's presence (or lack thereof). Hard to believe, I know.

So, with these two central premises in tow, we might surmise that Jesus didn't see that His presence would truly be as expedient to our having faith as our typical human presumptions would have us conclude.

Another inconvenient truth ... along with the one stating that carbon emissions produce Global Warming. Too bad, so sad!

2PhiloVoid

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

You said that your God curses those who listen to the words of men. You said that men are wicked and untrustworthy. YOU said these things. Yet you accept the word of men when they wrote the bible.

Do you know how many men have CLAIMED to be speaking for God, yet they are speaking perversely, they are opposed to God, they reject Jesus, and their only motive is to kill, to steal and to destroy ?
Have you found ANYTHING except the BIBLE to be truthful ?
Do you trust men to tell you what it says and what it means ? (men who lie to you)
(Or if not the Bible, any other document or work of men, even if they claim to be of God or any other source).
Did you read the Bible? (apparently not yet)
God says He curses men who trust in the flesh/ men who trust in men/ men who trust in idols/ men who have ANY other god besides the One True God. (DID you READ THAT YET?)
(sorry , no short cuts. It is a 3 month read at least (well, often anyway; perhaps the Bible could be read in a few days...) )....

Test Everything (God says). Don't trust men(flesh; nor even whole countries or the strenght of any of man's weapons nor any of man's armies) . (God says).

So, then, HOW could you possibly find out ANYTHING TRUE ? HOW CAN ANYONE ?

 

[Hieronymus]

Abosulutely. I want to believe as many true things as possible.

So what's with the Darwinism then?

 

[amariselle]

There is no difference between what you have described and a delusion. How would you know?

Claiming that a Christian's personal, spiritual experience is a "delusion" is certainly not a new suggestion.
That suggestion hardly explains how Christianity has survived for around 2,000 years however. Surely a mere delusion would have died out long ago.

 

[Job8]

Yet you accept the word of men when they wrote the bible.

If the Bible was merely the words of men, why would anyone bother with it? The fact that it is the Word of God and is treated as such by millions speaks for itself.

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

Suggesting that a Christian's personal, spiritual experience is a "delusion" is certainly not a new suggestion.
That suggestion hardly explains how Christianity has survived for around 2,000 years however. Surely a mere delusion would have died out long ago.

At first glance, this seems like a good argument.
But then again, there are several delusions that have not died out in the last 2000 years, and even more.
So, some other criteria is required to differentiate ekklesia from non-ekklesia; God's People from those who are not God's People.....
OR not?
Around the world, people 'outside' have been able to tell the difference just watching.
They don't need any thing more than they can see
to tell the difference between lights and non-lights in the world. ... a mystery? or purposeful deception or delusion upon themselves who cannot see ?

 

[amariselle]

At first glance, this seems like a good argument.
But then again, there are several delusions that have not died out in the last 2000 years, and even more.
So, some other criteria is required to differentiate ekklesia from non-ekklesia; God's People from those who are not God's People.....
OR not?
Around the world, people 'outside' have been able to tell the difference just watching.
They don't need any thing more than they can see
to tell the difference between lights and non-lights in the world. ... a mystery? or purposeful deception or delusion upon themselves who cannot see ?

Okay, what delusions are you referring to?

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

Okay, what delusions are you referring to?

According to which authority ?

 

[ScottA]

So fake answers to false assertions.

Got it.

Apparently not. "Objective" evidence only applies to object-based reality. What were you thinking?

 

[ScottA]

There is no difference between what you have described and a delusion. How would you know?

What is the difference between a delusion made up of space, time, and matter, and a delusion made up in the mind?

 

[amariselle]

According to which authority ?

You stated that certain delusions have continued for 2,000 years or even more, so I am just asking which delusions you see referring too.

 

[Deidre32]

I already do.

Well, don't limit yourself.

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

You stated that certain delusions have continued for 2,000 years or even more, so I am just asking which delusions you see referring too.

I understand your question, but I don't understand you. What authority do you accept
or what authority did you make your statements in one quote >

Claiming that a Christian's personal, spiritual experience is a "delusion" is certainly not a new suggestion.
That suggestion hardly explains how Christianity has survived for around 2,000 years however. Surely a mere delusion would have died out long ago.

(1) When a Christian's personal spiritual experience is called a delusion, is that ever right ? If so , by what authority ?
(2) How did Christianity survive for around 2,000 years ? (this is awkward: "animals have survived also, for well over 2000 years; yet many are extinct, and many more near extinction, while some have thrived .... .... Did those that survived have anything 'better' than those that went extinct ? Or was it just that those that man decided to kill are the ones that went extinct - nothing better nor worse about them ?
(3) If 10 people are deluded, or 10,000, or 10,000,000 , who decides they are the ones deluded ?
i.e. what authority did you use yourself to know or to decide who is deluded and who is not?
Or have you ever in your life seen the difference ? If you saw the difference, then "how" did you see the difference?

Another was to ask this, maybe simplest is >
Do you HONESTLY believe that mankind has not been under delusions for over 2000 years?
If that is what you honestly believe,
then what would it take to change your mind ?

 

[Gregory Thompson]

Michael, can you help me out and let me know what exactly does that mean in terms of our human experience?

Can you give me a real life example where holy spirit worked to help you through a decision... I just want to understand what exactly you are talking about.

Well there was this one time, I was walking along and all of a sudden just stopped and then a car sped out of a hidden alleyway and stopped right in front of me. If I had kept walking I knew I would have been run over. But maybe an angel stopped me or I just have a fine tuned intuition.
.
There was this other time when I was out in the cold and my snowsuit was soaked and I realized by the time I got home that I didn't have my keys and it was very cold and windy. I realized that If I kept walking, the seams in my snow suit would have let too much cold in so I wouldn't have made it. So I decided to stand and wait til my family came home, while I was waiting this fiery warmth came out of the middle of me and kept me warm until someone arrived to let me in. And I didn't get shakes like when it's just metabolism, so it's like I was a burning bush for a short time, fire inside but it didn't consume me.
.
Later on when I was learning about healing, i'd get a sense of when it would "work" . though lately, most of the healing stuff I learned is a personal application. My body's pain threshold is dreadfully low and the most recent spiritual transformations have involved sharing afflictions.
.
There were many such instances where the holy spirit taught me through life and the creation, the stuff i've learned later enhanced my understanding of scripture when I read it so I could apply it to everyday things and the news.
.
The main way the holy spirit altered my decision making is there has been an ingrained intuitive idea of how to avoid violent situations and about what to pray in some situations.
.
The most recent life change (feeling what others do) communicates the core principle "treat others as you would like to be treated" very blatantly ... it's pretty hard, but it definitely influences the way I see the world and how I make decisions.
.
The holy spirit influences my decisions by transforming me on the inside, I'm still me but God is here with me.

 

[amariselle]

I understand your question, but I don't understand you. What authority do you accept
or what authority did you make your statements in one quote >


(1) When a Christian's personal spiritual experience is called a delusion, is that ever right ? If so , by what authority ?
(2) How did Christianity survive for around 2,000 years ? (this is awkward: "animals have survived also, for well over 2000 years; yet many are extinct, and many more near extinction, while some have thrived .... .... Did those that survived have anything 'better' than those that went extinct ? Or was it just that those that man decided to kill are the ones that went extinct - nothing better nor worse about them ?
(3) If 10 people are deluded, or 10,000, or 10,000,000 , who decides they are the ones deluded ?
i.e. what authority did you use yourself to know or to decide who is deluded and who is not?
Or have you ever in your life seen the difference ? If you saw the difference, then "how" did you see the difference?

Another was to ask this, maybe simplest is >
Do you HONESTLY believe that mankind has not been under delusions for over 2000 years?
If that is what you honestly believe,
then what would it take to change your mind ?

Excuse me?

I think you need to go back and re-read my original comment. You seem to have completely misunderstood me. I never said ANYONE was "deluded", I was responding to the suggestion someone else made that there is no difference between a personal, spiritual experience and what some may call a delusion.

I have no idea why you interpreted my comment as accusing someone of being deluded, or inferring that I know enough to say when someone is or isn't deluded, because I said no such thing.

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

Excuse me?

I think you need to go back and re-read my original comment. You seem to have completely misunderstood me. I never said ANYONE was "deluded", I was responding to the suggestion someone else made that there is no difference between a personal, spiritual experience and what some may call a delusion.

I have no idea why you interpreted my comment as accusing someone of being deluded, or inferring that I know enough to say when someone is or isn't deluded, because I said no such thing.

Yes, I know that - it was clear you did not say who is nor who was deluded at any time. I brought out that there have been people deluded (even for 2000 years).

Your comment about

Claiming that a Christian's personal, spiritual experience is a "delusion" is certainly not a new suggestion.

this carries no weight IF there is no difference in who is deluded and who is not deluded.

That's why I asked what "authority" would you accept (about who is or who isn't deluded ).

The only authority I understand that shows clearly who is deluded and who is not
is
the Bible, when understood correctly by God's gracious revelation and grace in Jesus.

All through history, this has been true. (And continues true until Jesus returns)

 

[HitchSlap]

So what's with the Darwinism then?

If you have to ask, you wouldn't understand anyway.