Colt
Well-Known Member
Wow! Where in the heck did I say anything about a sacrifice? Jesus never taught human sacrifice nor did he teach that he was to be a sacrifice!No such thing as a "loving" father who demands a human sacrifice.
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:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Wow! Where in the heck did I say anything about a sacrifice? Jesus never taught human sacrifice nor did he teach that he was to be a sacrifice!No such thing as a "loving" father who demands a human sacrifice.
There was childhood, and there was adulthood. Jesus was moving from one to the other. He learned from his suffering in the furnace of affliction. There was some kind of transformation he had to undergo, and his obedience had to be proven by his own death. He also had to agree that he was deserving of death or he would have been required to protest against it. The elusive explanation for this was only mentioned in scripture once to my knowledge in Hebrews 5:9 which said he was made perfect only after death. Paul's letters also seemed to allude to the same when discussing why an obedient person had to be condemned, speaking about it as if it were evidence in a court, evidence in humanity's favor. The court was to find that humanity was salvageable. Even though Jesus suffered, and even though he prayed and cried to be saved from death; he went through it for the joy set before him which joy was us. So was it easy? No, it was not easy; but he was highly motivated.Was it easy for Jesus to live according to the will of his loving Universal Father?
Thank you for another thoughtful post. Lately I've been reflecting a lot on the diversity of the planet, including the human species, and how certain folks are just so completely unaware of it, due to the nature of the subconscious mind. (What goes into the mind is the sum total of the mind.) For example, if they speak a single language. although they know intellectually the planet has 1000+ languages, they only FEEL one. The tendency for a person to feel that the entire world must perceive, think, feel, just like they do is absolutely false, and when they encounter something very far away from how they perceive, it's puzzling.Yet another post by a member asking whether they believe so-and-so (and of course admitting that they do) led me to ask myself why is it I find it so difficult to believe claims without evidence, while others appear to accept almost any claim absolutely uncritically.
I'm old enough to have been exposed to all the strange stuff: spontaneous human combustion, ghosts, religion (of every kind), conspiracy theories, Elvis-lives, auras, astral travel, psychokenesis, ESP, parapsychology, alien abductions (usually with penetrating body probes!), yeti and sasquatch and chupacabra, Edgar Cayce, resurrections (of Christ and many others), YEC, -- oh, my this list could go on forever. Humans have believed (and do believe) so many strange things.
But what I've noticed is this: there seemn to be people (like me, and other skeptics and critical thinkers in the Forum) who find it difficult to near-impossible to believe strange claims for which we see no real evidence ---- but there are others who seem predisposed, almost programmed, to believe almost anything at all, no matter how unlikely.
Michael Shermer wrote a book called "Why Do People Believe Weird Things" and it got a pretty good reception -- but only from the usual skeptical thinkers. The "Woo" crowd hated it.
Why is it, do you think, that some people are willing to believe pretty much anything, while others hold out for evidence?
And some believe an intelligent designer or life giver magically existed where there is no existence whatever, and had the power (where the absence of anything at all implies the absence of power, too) -- and how likely is that?
And some believe an intelligent designer or life giver magically existed where there is no existence whatever, and had the power (where the absence of anything at all implies the absence of power, too) -- and how likely is that?
I did not claim science said anything of the kind -- I asked "how likely is that?", in response to a member asking me how likely is it that the universe just popped into existed without a creator. So I ask what many of us think is an entirely logical and justified question, "where do you think this intelligent designer and creator comes from?", to which no theist ever provides any answer than, "it was always there."Where do you get your facts? Certainly not from science. Science cannot say that God did not or does not exist where nothing else exists.
So your conclusion is a leap of faith beyond what science can say.
I did not claim science said anything of the kind -- I asked "how likely is that?", in response to a member asking me how likely is it that the universe just popped into existed without a creator. So I ask what many of us think is an entirely logical and justified question, "where do you think this intelligent designer and creator comes from?", to which no theist ever provides any answer than, "it was always there."
...
The easy part was to wait for Paul and others to make up stories about him.Was it easy for Jesus to live according to the will of his loving Universal Father?
Yet another post by a member asking whether they believe so-and-so (and of course admitting that they do)
Yet another post by a member asking whether they believe so-and-so (and of course admitting that they do) led me to ask myself why is it I find it so difficult to believe claims without evidence, while others appear to accept almost any claim absolutely uncritically.
I'm old enough to have been exposed to all the strange stuff: spontaneous human combustion, ghosts, religion (of every kind), conspiracy theories, Elvis-lives, auras, astral travel, psychokenesis, ESP, parapsychology, alien abductions (usually with penetrating body probes!), yeti and sasquatch and chupacabra, Edgar Cayce, resurrections (of Christ and many others), YEC, -- oh, my this list could go on forever. Humans have believed (and do believe) so many strange things.
But what I've noticed is this: there seemn to be people (like me, and other skeptics and critical thinkers in the Forum) who find it difficult to near-impossible to believe strange claims for which we see no real evidence ---- but there are others who seem predisposed, almost programmed, to believe almost anything at all, no matter how unlikely.
Michael Shermer wrote a book called "Why Do People Believe Weird Things" and it got a pretty good reception -- but only from the usual skeptical thinkers. The "Woo" crowd hated it.
Why is it, do you think, that some people are willing to believe pretty much anything, while others hold out for evidence?
I used to be a person that would be willing to believe in pretty much anything, until I heard of skeptcism in my early twenties. Then it rang a bell and I never looked back. Considering this experience, I would say there is definitely a 'nurture' aspect to it.
"Unlikely" seems to be in the eye of the beholder.
Some people see it as likely that this universe and the life and consciousness in it came into existence without any intelligent design or life giver.
How likely is that?
Or for atheists to make up stories about Paul making up stories.The easy part was to wait for Paul and others to make up stories about him.
I'd say the probability right now is sitting at 100%. Unfortunately we don't have another universe that was created by an intelligent design and life giver to compare our universe to, and everything we can see and study appears to form naturally, so why should anything else form differently when it comes to the natural world's deepest history?
That could change if we actually find and discover a life giver and intelligent designer, but until we find one, the intelligent designer and life giver theory is not looking too concrete, imo
I found a life giver and intelligent designer but I don't think you would agree.
I did not claim science said anything of the kind -- I asked "how likely is that?", in response to a member asking me how likely is it that the universe just popped into existed without a creator. So I ask what many of us think is an entirely logical and justified question, "where do you think this intelligent designer and creator comes from?", to which no theist ever provides any answer than, "it was always there."
Why wouldn't I agree?
Pics or it didn't happen.I found a life giver and intelligent designer but I don't think you would agree.
Because you said " the probability right now is sitting at 100%."