Trailblazer
Veteran Member
Jesus did not say that the temple was His body, someone else said that.
"But he spake of the temple of his body."
-
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!
Why would it matter if Jesus had risen from the dead?
- Thread starter Trailblazer
- Start date
"But he spake of the temple of his body."
Ok so its less trustworthy because someone said Jesus said something? Is that the track your going down ? Well we best throw out the entire bible then, because the Bible is full of someone saying God said something. This is a silly attempt to cast Doubt on the scriptures.
PureX
Veteran Member
We all have our own "truth" to proclaim. So I don't see why you would find this unusual. Sharing these with each other is how we broaden our mental awareness. What we don't have is any universal truth to proclaim. Not if we're being honest, anyway. All we ever have is the truth as we currently perceive it.
I think some folks have a very difficult time accepting this aspect of the human condition, which is why they elevate things like the Bible to the state of being God (i.e., absolute and unquestionable). They just can't face that bottomless void of 'unknowing' and the endless doubt that is the human condition. They turn to religions that sell them the antidote of "belief" instead of choosing faith, day by day, and acting on it for it's own sake.
This is how religions so often do more harm than they do good for people.
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
Yes it is the track I am going down when people claim that Jesus said he was going to rise from the dead and Jesus never said that. I don't do that with the entire Bible, only when people make claims about something really important.
//We all have our own "truth" to proclaim//
Not sure what this means? This would be contradictory if you mean absolute truths? And again you keep making absolute truth claims, with no standard your pointing to ? Am I to refer to you as the absolute standard ?
Everything we know about Jesus is from what others said he said. We should want this . Most things in a court of law is based on eye witness testimonials and its suspicious when the person in question is proclaiming his own narrative only.
//I don't do that with the entire Bible, only when people make claims about something really important// lol this is priceless . You mean where it disagrees with your beliefs ? " ah that wasn't what Jesus said ,that was what someone said that Jesus said " . This is a ridiculous standard . The fact of the situation is that Jesus never wrote any of the bible , so your criteria is not rational.
Last edited:
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
Jesus did not speak in the last days, Jesus spoke 2000 years ago. We are now living in the last days and Baha'u'llah has spoken for God so now we can know what God wants in the age we are living in.
“Attract the hearts of men, through the call of Him, the one alone Beloved. Say: This is the Voice of God, if ye do but hearken. This is the Day Spring of the Revelation of God, did ye but know it. This is the Dawning-Place of the Cause of God, were ye to recognize it. This is the Source of the commandment of God, did ye but judge it fairly. This is the manifest and hidden Secret; would that ye might perceive it.” Gleanings From the Writings of Bahá’u’lláh, p. 34
PureX
Veteran Member
I have made no absolute truth claims that I am aware of. How would I even know if I had done so? How would you? Neither of us has any idea what is absolutely true and what isn't. Not by any rational means, anyway.
Hebrews 1 .
1¶God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the fathers by the prophets,
2Hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son, whom he hath appointed heir of all things, by whom also he made the worlds;
3Who being the brightness of his glory, and the express image of his person, and upholding all things by the word of his power, when he had by himself purged our sins, sat down on the right hand of the Majesty on high;
Well if you want to believe something outside the bible, your free to do so . But there is no more revelation from any one other than what we already have in the bible. So what you believe is not a biblical based belief.
I believe the bible is the standard . It is absolutely true .
Nimos
Well-Known Member
Not a 100% sure
Its probably because of how you would make up for sins, like if you did something bad, you would sacrifice an animal or whatever. But what more can God sacrifice than his son for the sins of humanity?... Obviously a bit messy, because he didn't really die, he just went back to God... so he had some rough days I guess you can say
And still, I don't really know why God would have to sacrifice anyone, instead of just changing the rules he made, as they were pretty damn stupid to begin with
Personally I can't tell you what was/is gained from this story, again except showing how incompetent God is. It like he tries to get out on top as being the big guy, when he was the one that screwed it all up to begin with, blaming Adam and Eve for something that weren't their fault.
Again, im not going to try to defend it, it makes as much sense to me as it probably does to you
"The problem with being privileged your whole life is that because you have had that privilege for so long, equality starts to look like oppression." - Mark Caddo
Yes.
The claim of resurrection wasn't original. There were quite a few examples already of gods who died for three days and were then resurrected, often in the springtime, often born to a virgin. It's a motif that represents the sun reaching its southernmost excursion, stopping for three days, and then resuming its path northward, as the days begin getting longer and the green earth is born again.
From Other Gods That Rose From the Dead in Spring Before Jesus Christ :
"Attis, a Phrygian-Greek vegetation god born of the virgin Nana, castrated himself and, depending on the version, either bled to death from this or was hanged on a pine tree. He was reborn after three days, his blood redeeming the earth as it fell from his body. His worshipers celebrated the salvation from death offered to them by Attis by decorating a pine tree each spring."
"In Egypt, Osiris died, was resurrected, and ascended into heaven. Horus came back from the dead. Like many gods related to vegetation, Adonis, worshiped in Babylonia and Syria as early as the 7th century B.C., died annually (in the fall) and was resurrected (in the spring)."
What value do the gospels have if Jesus wasn't a god or the channel of a god? I still don't see why anybody who thought of Jesus was an ordinary man or a legend would study the gospels. How many people do you know personally who have lived lives like that or better, or who can offer better life advice? I know plenty.
Christians probably want to claim that that is because those people read Jesus or were influenced by others who did, but Jesus' message was commonplace. Jesus was a typical preacher saying to obey God and be nice to one another. Buddha and many others said it first in some variation of the Golden Rule:
"Do to the doer to cause that he do thus to you." - Ancient Egyptian concept of Maat(c. 2040-1650 BCE)
"Avoid doing what you would blame others for doing." - Thales (c. 624 BC - c. 546 BCE)
"Regard your neighbor's gain as your own gain, and your neighbor's loss as your own loss." - Lao Tzu (604-531 BCE)
"Never impose on others what you would not choose for yourself." - Confucius (c. 551-479 BCE)
"One should never do that to another which one regards as injurious to one's own self. This, in brief, is the rule of dharma. Other behavior is due to selfish desires." - The Hindu Mahabharata [book] circa 400 BCE
For me, Buddha's message was better than Jesus'. Buddha wants you to be good because it is a better life for you and others. Jesus says be good so that you can be rewarded later.
This is better than anything I've read in the gospels:
Buddha gives practical reasons for curbing anger, not threats of perdition:
For me, there was nothing special about the life of Jesus. He was just another religious guy preaching. All the special stuff came after his death at the hands of people such as Paul and Constantine. This was a relatively ordinary life amplified by others with an agenda, one that required deification of their central figure, and the message that somehow those words were not just special, but divine. I don't see it.
My position is to avoid faith-based thinking. I start with "there may or might not be a god." I'm still there.
Secular humanists typically avoid making claims they can't support with compelling evidence.
Furthermore, rational skeptics aren't interested in anything that would be generated from "axioms" or premises based in faith. A conclusion can be no more sound than its premises however flawless the subsequent reasoning that connects those premises to a that conclusion is. If I adopt on faith the axiom that A is not equal to A, whatever I derive from that is useless.
Yes. And third-hand knowledge is even less reliable than second-hand. You're aware of the game called telephone and Chinese whispers, I trust. With each iteration of Xeroxing a Xerox, there is loss of fidelity (information).
Many of us already have for the reasons just given - it presumes the existence of a god. If that isn't true, nothing derived from that belief is sound.
Speaking of third-hand information, hearsay is not allowed in a court of law except in rare circumstances such as dying declarations. There's a reason for that, and we just covered it - loss of fidelity (reliability) in the retellings.
Yes.
The claim of resurrection wasn't original. There were quite a few examples already of gods who died for three days and were then resurrected, often in the springtime, often born to a virgin. It's a motif that represents the sun reaching its southernmost excursion, stopping for three days, and then resuming its path northward, as the days begin getting longer and the green earth is born again.
From Other Gods That Rose From the Dead in Spring Before Jesus Christ :
"Attis, a Phrygian-Greek vegetation god born of the virgin Nana, castrated himself and, depending on the version, either bled to death from this or was hanged on a pine tree. He was reborn after three days, his blood redeeming the earth as it fell from his body. His worshipers celebrated the salvation from death offered to them by Attis by decorating a pine tree each spring."
"In Egypt, Osiris died, was resurrected, and ascended into heaven. Horus came back from the dead. Like many gods related to vegetation, Adonis, worshiped in Babylonia and Syria as early as the 7th century B.C., died annually (in the fall) and was resurrected (in the spring)."
What value do the gospels have if Jesus wasn't a god or the channel of a god? I still don't see why anybody who thought of Jesus was an ordinary man or a legend would study the gospels. How many people do you know personally who have lived lives like that or better, or who can offer better life advice? I know plenty.
Christians probably want to claim that that is because those people read Jesus or were influenced by others who did, but Jesus' message was commonplace. Jesus was a typical preacher saying to obey God and be nice to one another. Buddha and many others said it first in some variation of the Golden Rule:
"Hurt not others in ways that you yourself would find hurtful."
And he wasn't alone. All of these people antedate Christ:
"Do to the doer to cause that he do thus to you." - Ancient Egyptian concept of Maat(c. 2040-1650 BCE)
"Avoid doing what you would blame others for doing." - Thales (c. 624 BC - c. 546 BCE)
"Regard your neighbor's gain as your own gain, and your neighbor's loss as your own loss." - Lao Tzu (604-531 BCE)
"Never impose on others what you would not choose for yourself." - Confucius (c. 551-479 BCE)
"One should never do that to another which one regards as injurious to one's own self. This, in brief, is the rule of dharma. Other behavior is due to selfish desires." - The Hindu Mahabharata [book] circa 400 BCE
For me, Buddha's message was better than Jesus'. Buddha wants you to be good because it is a better life for you and others. Jesus says be good so that you can be rewarded later.
This is better than anything I've read in the gospels:
"Do not believe in anything simply because you have heard it. Do not believe in anything simply because it spoken and rumored by many. Do not believe in anything simply because it is found in your religious books. Do not believe in anything merely on the authority of your teachers and elders. Do not believe in traditions because they have been handed down for many generations. But after observation and analysis, when you find that anything agrees with reason and is conductive to the good and benefit of one and all, then accept it and live up to it." - Buddha
Buddha gives practical reasons for curbing anger, not threats of perdition:
"You will not be punished for your anger. You will be punished by your anger." - The Buddha
For me, there was nothing special about the life of Jesus. He was just another religious guy preaching. All the special stuff came after his death at the hands of people such as Paul and Constantine. This was a relatively ordinary life amplified by others with an agenda, one that required deification of their central figure, and the message that somehow those words were not just special, but divine. I don't see it.
My position is to avoid faith-based thinking. I start with "there may or might not be a god." I'm still there.
Secular humanists typically avoid making claims they can't support with compelling evidence.
Furthermore, rational skeptics aren't interested in anything that would be generated from "axioms" or premises based in faith. A conclusion can be no more sound than its premises however flawless the subsequent reasoning that connects those premises to a that conclusion is. If I adopt on faith the axiom that A is not equal to A, whatever I derive from that is useless.
Yes. And third-hand knowledge is even less reliable than second-hand. You're aware of the game called telephone and Chinese whispers, I trust. With each iteration of Xeroxing a Xerox, there is loss of fidelity (information).
Many of us already have for the reasons just given - it presumes the existence of a god. If that isn't true, nothing derived from that belief is sound.
Speaking of third-hand information, hearsay is not allowed in a court of law except in rare circumstances such as dying declarations. There's a reason for that, and we just covered it - loss of fidelity (reliability) in the retellings.
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
Jesus was referring to Himself, but not to His body. Jesus was not His physical body, Jesus was the Spirit of God and a Manifestation of God. What Jesus meant in John 2:19 is that His Spirit/Soul could not be destroyed, and He wasn't destroyed because His Spirit/Soul continued to live in heaven where it took on a new form, a spiritual body. Only His physical body was destroyed, but the physical body is not who He was.
John 3:5-7 Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again.
John 6:63 It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life.
1 John 2:16 For all that is in the world, the lust of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the pride of life, is not of the Father, but is of the world.
The other meaning of John 2:19 is that the Cause of Christ could not be destroyed by destroying His body at the crucifixion because His Cause, which was the Cause of God, would be raised up after He was crucified. That is exactly what happened when after three days the disciples became assured and steadfast, and began to serve the Cause of Christ, and resolved to spread the divine teachings, putting His counsels into practice, and arising to serve Him. The Reality of Christ became resplendent and His bounty appeared, so it was not destroyed.
In response to another inquiry Tony explained what the word temple refers to in a post he wrote some time ago.
CG Didymus said: ↑
And I that's would I've heard also. So does anything significant happen 2300 evenings and morning or days or years after that? But, one other thing, was the Temple rededicated and the daily sacrifice reinstituted after Antiochus desecrated it?
The Temple is the Manifestation of God.
"Thus have We built the Temple with the hands of power and might, could ye but know it. This is the Temple promised unto you in the Book. Draw ye nigh unto it. This is that which profiteth you, could ye but comprehend it. Be fair, O peoples of the earth! Which is preferable, this, or a temple which is built of clay? Set your faces towards it. Thus have ye been commanded by God, the Help in Peril, the Self-Subsisting. Follow ye His bidding, and praise ye God, your Lord, for that which He hath bestowed upon you. He, verily, is the Truth. No God is there but He. He revealeth what He pleaseth, through His words “Be and it is”.
Regards Tony
#443 Tony Bristow-Stagg, Jan 6, 2021
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
No, the analogy to a court of law does not apply because nobody is on trial. It would have been much better if we had the direct writings of Jesus as we have for Baha'u'llah, but we do not have those words so we have to rely upon what was passed does to us by way of oral tradition.
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
And that is the precise problem, Jesus never wrote any of the Bible, so we can never know if Jesus said anything that was recorded. That is what makes Christianity a faith-based religion, not a fact-based religion.
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
There have been three Revelations from God since the Bible was written, from Muhammad, from the Bab, and from Baha'u'llah. It is no longer necessary to look at the Bible to know God's will and God's will for this age is not recorded in the Bible, it is recorded in the Writings of Baha'u'llah.
Colt
Well-Known Member
You are calling Jesus, his apostles and eye witnesses to the resurrection liars because the Baha’is don’t believe today. I’m with Jesus, I don’t believe the Baha’is.
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
The story of Adam and Eve would not make sense if I had to believe it was literally true.And still, I don't really know why God would have to sacrifice anyone, instead of just changing the rules he made, as they were pretty damn stupid to begin with
Personally I can't tell you what was/is gained from this story, again except showing how incompetent God is. It like he tries to get out on top as being the big guy, when he was the one that screwed it all up to begin with, blaming Adam and Eve for something that weren't their fault.
Again, im not going to try to defend it, it makes as much sense to me as it probably does to you
If I believed the story of Adam and Eve and the garden was literally true then maybe I would think that God was the one who screwed up, blaming Adam and Eve for something that was not their fault but I believe that the story of Adam and Eve is an allegory, not a true story.
I believe that the story of Adam and Eve who ate from the tree, and their expulsion from Paradise is a symbol. The story contains divine mysteries and universal meanings, and it is capable of many explanations.
I believe that there was a real man called Adam and that He was the first Prophet of the Adamic Cycle of religion. I also believe we inherited the sins of Adam, but not because he ate an apple from a tree. This is how I believe the descendants of Adam inherited the sins of Adam:
The meaning of the serpent is attachment to the human world. This attachment of the spirit to the human world led the soul and spirit of Adam from the world of freedom to the world of bondage and caused Him to turn from the Kingdom of God to the human world. When the soul and spirit of Adam entered the human world, He came out from the paradise of freedom and fell into the world of bondage. From the height of purity and absolute goodness, He entered into the world of good and evil.
The full explanation of what I believe about the allegory is in this chapter: 30: ADAM AND EVE
Trailblazer
Veteran Member
That Jesus was raised from the dead is a claim, not a historical fact.
Jesus is alive in heaven alongside Baha'u'llah and all the Messengers if God, in a spiritual body.
I believe in a Savior but not a risen one since rising had nothing to do with being the Savior.