|
1 registered members (TedMar),
1,420
guests, and 3
spiders. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Re: Jesus has returned....erhem
[Re: PHeMoX]
#116475
03/23/07 02:02
03/23/07 02:02
|
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 718
Wisconsin
Irish_Farmer
OP
User
|
OP
User
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 718
Wisconsin
|
Quote:
Besides, changes in texts about multiple Gods instead of one, reincarnation, women's position and origin (rib from adam or not) and for example details about Maria or Jesus's wife and children and what more are rather big changes imho...
I'd need to know specifics. If the "multi gods" thing is referring to Elohim, then first of all, that isn't a change, its still in the text. Secondly, Elohim appears to have a looser general meaning, more akin to our "powers" than it is to "gods".
I've never heard of any textual criticism alleging that any of those things were originally in the bible. Perhaps you can enlighten me? I'd imagine that I would have heard much of the reincarnation crap, since I've talked to reincarnationists, and they didn't have anything worth noting.
Last edited by Irish_Farmer; 03/23/07 02:03.
"The task force finds that...the unborn child is a whole human being from the moment of fertilization, that all abortions terminate the life of a human being, and that the unborn child is a separate human patient under the care of modern medicine."
|
|
|
Re: Jesus has returned....erhem
[Re: Irish_Farmer]
#116476
03/23/07 02:48
03/23/07 02:48
|
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 8,177
Netherlands
PHeMoX
Senior Expert
|
Senior Expert
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 8,177
Netherlands
|
I'd have to look up some things to come with a more detailed statement as for the actual content of those subjects I've mentioned, but basically it comes down to the fact that for example Constatine has removed whole pages from the bible that dealt with reincarnation.
The multiple Gods thing does not explicitly refer to Elohim, but the word Elohim itself is one of many clues, it really mean Gods as in 'plural of God' and it would make sense within it's context too, or at least it's not like you can derive from the context that it must be one God. The 'power' translation is controversial, many scholars do not think that's what was intended there. There are also people who say that the Holy Spirit, Jesus Christ and God are actually 3 separate 'Gods' of equal strength so to say. Not sure on which exact biblical phrases they base this though.
About Maria and Jesus' life/wife and children are basically mere rumours, or at least I haven't seen anyone back those statements up with some acceptable evidence. Then again, there is close to zero evidence that the Jesus of the bible even existed, but we've had that discussion already, so I'll leave it be.
As for women, perhaps you know that the church wanted to get the society to move from a matriarchy society (in the Jewish society women are very important) towards a patriarchy society (the man becomes the most important) and thus removed important parts that dealt with women doing extraordinary things (miracles perhaps) or very important events that involved very important women (sorry for the lack of examples here). (The original reason why women used to be very important is because of the fact that they can give birth, making them vital for any society to last long.)
It's also the reason why Jesus as a biblical person got so much attention and became the lead person of Christianity. The church needed this solely to expand their power,
Cheers
|
|
|
Re: Jesus has returned....erhem
[Re: AlbertoT]
#116478
03/23/07 22:59
03/23/07 22:59
|
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 718
Wisconsin
Irish_Farmer
OP
User
|
OP
User
Joined: Feb 2004
Posts: 718
Wisconsin
|
Quote:
No offence but I can not but wonder why these guys can prosperous in the new world only.
Here , in the old cynic Europe, nobody would follow such an imbecile
Maybe next time you can even-out the "intellectual insults against america" and "blatant grammatical errors" ratio in your next post, so that its a little less ironic. 
Quote:
I'd have to look up some things to come with a more detailed statement as for the actual content of those subjects I've mentioned, but basically it comes down to the fact that for example Constatine has removed whole pages from the bible that dealt with reincarnation.
This is the second time you've made, what I would consider to be, outrageous statements. The first time being (I think this was you) the time you implied that Constantine controlled what appeared in the bible. The historical fact is that Constantine only provided the forum. In fact, his "side" in the debate lost out BIG TIME. His influence was minimal, at best.
Quote:
The multiple Gods thing does not explicitly refer to Elohim, but the word Elohim itself is one of many clues, it really mean Gods as in 'plural of God' and it would make sense within it's context too, or at least it's not like you can derive from the context that it must be one God.
Yes you could, since its often coupled with singular verbs.
Quote:
The 'power' translation is controversial, many scholars do not think that's what was intended there.
And yet many scholars do, including secular scholars. Actually, I should qualify that. Its not that they agree that "powers" is more accurate, but that it would be more accurate to attribute a meaning akin to "powers" than it would be to attribute a "gods" meaning to it.
Quote:
There are also people who say that the Holy Spirit, Jesus Christ and God are actually 3 separate 'Gods' of equal strength so to say.
Yes, they're called heretics. 
Quote:
Not sure on which exact biblical phrases they base this though.
I'm sure they do what reincarnationists and gnostics (they're still around :\ ), etc do, which is to assume their philosophy is true (especially in spite of the context the bible was written in, or usually with an attempted revising of the context of the bible) and then read their philosophy INTO the bible, not FROM the bible.
Quote:
About Maria and Jesus' life/wife and children are basically mere rumours, or at least I haven't seen anyone back those statements up with some acceptable evidence. Then again, there is close to zero evidence that the Jesus of the bible even existed, but we've had that discussion already, so I'll leave it be.
You're being a fundy on the issue , and I have no desire to argue it. You've also demonstrated, on several occasions, that you have VERY high standards for Jesus that many other (undisputed) historical figures couldn't meet. Though, keep in mind that I wasn't following the discussion between you and Kinji, or whoever, for more than a few seconds.
Quote:
As for women, perhaps you know that the church wanted to get the society to move from a matriarchy society (in the Jewish society women are very important) towards a patriarchy society (the man becomes the most important) and thus removed important parts that dealt with women doing extraordinary things (miracles perhaps) or very important events that involved very important women (sorry for the lack of examples here). (The original reason why women used to be very important is because of the fact that they can give birth, making them vital for any society to last long.)
I don't know. I would have to see more information on it, since I haven't heard this charge before.
Quote:
It's also the reason why Jesus as a biblical person got so much attention and became the lead person of Christianity. The church needed this solely to expand their power,
I'm sorry, this is why I have trouble taking this seriously. This whole criticism isn't based on honest, factual information. Its based on the assumption that the church's main concern was power (which is patently false, even if it was one of their minor agendas), and therefore all conclusions must inevitably be drawn from this presupposition. Its hard for me to take much of this seriously.
For instance, we would have a myriad of evidence that the early church rewrote women out of the bible because we have different copies of much of the literature from before the establishment of the early church. There's also extra-biblical literature on Jewish culture pre-Christianity. This is just too incredible a claim for me to consider, because such a "conspiracy" would be blatantly obvious and indefensible from out perspective. I would need some pretty good proof.
"The task force finds that...the unborn child is a whole human being from the moment of fertilization, that all abortions terminate the life of a human being, and that the unborn child is a separate human patient under the care of modern medicine."
|
|
|
Re: Jesus has returned....erhem
[Re: Irish_Farmer]
#116479
03/24/07 01:45
03/24/07 01:45
|
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 8,177
Netherlands
PHeMoX
Senior Expert
|
Senior Expert
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 8,177
Netherlands
|
Quote:
I'm sorry, this is why I have trouble taking this seriously. This whole criticism isn't based on honest, factual information. Its based on the assumption that the church's main concern was power (which is patently false, even if it was one of their minor agendas), and therefore all conclusions must inevitably be drawn from this presupposition. Its hard for me to take much of this seriously.
The 'assumption' is a 100% legit one though.
Quote:
This is the second time you've made, what I would consider to be, outrageous statements. The first time being (I think this was you) the time you implied that Constantine controlled what appeared in the bible. The historical fact is that Constantine only provided the forum. In fact, his "side" in the debate lost out BIG TIME. His influence was minimal, at best.
Nope, Constantine actually decided those pages should be left out. 'Outrageous statements' indeed, that's why it's such a big deal those things changed ...
Cheers
|
|
|
|
