Damned for eternity in hell? That seems harsh! On one side, we say he died for our sins and on other well...
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Ridiculous statement of Jesus?
- Thread starter kalyan
- Start date
This is not about BhagawadGita...
I agree. That doesn't make it ridiculous or false. Lots of things generally regarded as true are harsh and/or are ridiculous. I don't have a stock set of quotes from previous posts made by reputable sources on harsh truth, but I do have one for "truths" that are completely unintuitive and "ridiculous":
"an entity can be physical without being actual."
Kastner, R. E. (2012). The Transactional Interpretation of Quantum Mechanics: The Reality of Possibility. Cambridge University Press.
"We now know that the moon is demonstrably not there when nobody looks."
Mermin, N. D. (1981). Quantum mysteries for anyone. The Journal of Philosophy, 78(7), 397-408.
“The only reality is mind and observations”
Henry, R. C. (2005). The mental universe. Nature, 436(7047), 29-29.
“Our external physical reality is a mathematical structure”
Tegmark, M. (2008). The mathematical universe. Foundations of Physics, 38(2), 101-150.
“The laws of quantum physics are in conflict with a classical world, in particular, with local and macroscopic realism”
Kofler, J., & Brukner, Č. (2008). Conditions for quantum violation of macroscopic realism. Physical review letters, 101(9), 090403.
"It is generally believed that quantum physics refutes realism, materialism, determinism, and perhaps even rationality. These beliefs, central to the so-called Copenhagen interpretation, were held by the very fathers of the new physics, particularly Niels Bohr (1934), Max Born (1953), Werner Heisenberg (1958), and Wolfgang Pauli (1961)."
Bunge, M. (2012). Does Quantum Physics Refute Realism, Materialism and Determinism?. In Evaluating Philosophies (Boston Studies in the Philosophy of Science) (pp. 139-149). Springer.
"If one viewed the quantum state as a real physical object, one could get the paradoxical situation that future actions seem to have an influence on past and already irrevocably recorded events.”
Ma, X. S., Zotter, S., Kofler, J., Ursin, R., Jennewein, T., Brukner, Č., & Zeilinger, A. (2012). Experimental delayed-choice entanglement swapping. Nature Physics, 8(6), 479-484.
"the traditional conception of physical knowledge (originated in classical physics) based on realism, objectivity and determinism had to be abandoned and to be replaced by a new one.”
Paty, M. (1999). Are quantum systems physical objects with physical properties? European Journal of Physics 20: 373-388.
etc.
While I agree there is an inherent duality in the Christian faith that leads, IMO, to this POV that one either has to believe or one is going to 'hell', I think you are stating untruths here. Jesus didn't say the things you state here. Men wrote the Bible and as such, any statement made by any character of the Bible is made by those men to build a religion that could control the masses. Your post seems to indicate, at least to me, a very serious bias against the Christian faith. I tend to believe that if one follows a particular faith, or none at all, that is up to the individual. Insulting them based on your bias seems unfair to me.
This is not entirely true at all. The Christian faith does have an either/or scenario. Either you believe in the dogma or you're damned. And also, you compare being a child of a parent and then go on to state that because Jesus was the alleged son of God, he was God. You are not your father, nor your mother. You are an individual. The idea that Jesus was God is something I don't believe.
leibowde84
Veteran Member
We really don't know what Jesus actually said, and it seems plausible that the Gospel writers put these words in his mouth in order to strengthen his claims. But, that is just my theory. And, I truly don't think that the idea of hell goes with the spirit of his teachings.
We do it all the time.
Thief
Rogue Theologian
the response was there.
I suspect you do understand.
outhouse
Atheistically
That's me
Augustus though was Imperator Caesar Divi Filius Augustus
God in Latin is Deus, 'divi filius' results from being the adopted son of Julius Caesar, son of Divus Iulius. It is more 'son of the divine' rather than Deus filius, Son of God.
[I don't understand Latin though so stand to be corrected.]
Exactly.
I would also add it was based on a celestial event possibly a comet or meteor that is said to have influenced Augustus view that Caesar was resurrected.
Coins for a long time after had a shining star on them, and many scholars claim this is the origin of jesus birth star event.
Robert.Evans
You will be assimilated; it is His Will.
I don't think it is on "blackmailing". There is always some deeper truth there. Yahshuah was THE son of God and hell was the valley of hinnom that he spoke of. Having said that, for aeons (eternity) there is a place where what-is-not-fit is cleansed from that-which-is. So there are some truths in this.
Why do we need it?? Because it fulfils what those people are and what they believe. They don't know all things as no one does.
Robert.Evans
You will be assimilated; it is His Will.
If you read E Martin's account on it, you will find astronomical evidence for the event.Exactly.
I would also add it was based on a celestial event possibly a comet or meteor that is said to have influenced Augustus view that Caesar was resurrected.
Coins for a long time after had a shining star on them, and many scholars claim this is the origin of jesus birth star event.
outhouse
Atheistically
We find evidence for Augustus account.
Not Jesus. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Star_of_Bethlehem
Pious fiction
Many scholars, seeing the Gospel Nativity stories as later apologetic accounts created to establish the Messianic status of Jesus, regard the Star of Bethlehem as a pious fiction
Robert.Evans
You will be assimilated; it is His Will.
Many scholars probably do, and of course, you too. But then you have your agenda I guess. One will listen to whoever one chooses. But it is backed up and charts were changed at NASA as they saw the evidence he gave them
Robert.Evans
You will be assimilated; it is His Will.
Rather, represented the Word. You seem to be looking from the point of view that it is false in the first place.
Robert.Evans
You will be assimilated; it is His Will.
You are welcome to believe whatever you choose. Scripture says otherwise however.
outhouse
Atheistically
Yes there is a huge difference between truth backed by academia, and apologist who are solely faith based and have a desperate agenda to fit evidence to a preconceived mythological conclusion.
Truth. And nothing but.
No it is not.
Its why you cannot provide a credible source.
outhouse
Atheistically
Scripture has factually never been known to be 100% historically or scientifically accurate by any measure.
Forever_Catholic
Active Member
We are creatures of God. He is our Father in that way and we are his children in that way. And we, as human beings, are intended to be forever united with him, which us why he made us in his own image and likeness, unlike other earthly creatures. But the one God, who is Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, is not our Father in the sense that we are of the same divine substance, or essence as he is. Only God is God. Everything else and every other living thing is created.
McBell
Unbound
Can you present a reason to think it is true that is not a blatant logical fallacy and or wishful thinking?
Robert.Evans
You will be assimilated; it is His Will.
I have given a source, E Martin. If you choose to ignore him that is up to you. Stick with your history Outhouse.