Rossweisse
RIP Rossweisse, HellHost and long-time Shipmate.
Please see the thread in All Saints remembering her.

What to do with an atoning/non atoning Jesus?

1121314151618»

Comments

  • *sigh*

    I think what most of us were saying was that, whilst Aramaic was indeed written down, there probably wasn't all that much of it (certainly by our present-day standards).

    Does that sound like a reasonable conclusion?
  • I'm afraid that despite that, we're only on the 18th page of this.
  • Bishops FingerBishops Finger Shipmate
    edited September 2019
    :lol:

    Now, now - you know very well that I wasn't referring to the conclusion of the thread, but only to the tangent!
    :naughty:

    Seriously, though, James Boswell II seems to have got a bit upset about the Aramaic stuff, so I was trying to draw a line under the discussion.

    Meanwhile, we appear to have diverged somewhat from the OP...
  • However, I will now admit that it is true that your siding with Bishop's Finger was with regard to old English, but @mousethief took that to mean decisive proof that writing was not done in Aramaic in Jesus' time, and it seemed to me that you were saying the same. However, I will here admit that technically you did not, and thus apologize for getting what may have been a wrong impression, but it seems to me you sure did lay yourself open to it.
    Actually, I took exception to Bishops Finger's comment about writings in English.

    But I'll take the apology, such as it is. Thank you.

  • Thank you too. Really.
  • I will acknowledge again, as I did at the time (O! So long ago now!) that Nick Tamen was right to correct me in regard to what I said about Old English.
    :star:
  • In answer to your question - yes...
    :wink:

    I agree - ultimately, nothing matters.

    I'm reminded of Uncle Muskrat, in the Moomintroll books, who (IIRC) possessed a large Book entitled 'The Uselessness of Everything'.
    :smile:
    Well done with that reference!

    Shall we not live our lives as if the atonement doesn't exist? That there is nothing in it, except to live as a decent person for the sake of others as this Christ did? Spinoza told us that it is necessary to love God and to do what is right without ever expecting God to love us in return. --which is a revolutionary idea among our modern Christians who believe that God loves them personally and individually. This modern Jesus isn't very biblical is he?
  • No, he isn't...

    I'm afraid the idea of a personal god, answering personal prayer, and awarding either eternal life, or eternal damnation (equally awful concepts), is becoming increasingly unpalatable.

    Following what we think we know of the teachings of Jesus is, however, worth doing, inasmuch as it should affect others for good, rather than ill. So I'm not sure I would entirely agree with Uncle Muskrat's Book!
    :wink:
  • Nick TamenNick Tamen Shipmate
    edited September 2019
    No, he isn't...

    I'm afraid the idea of a personal god, answering personal prayer, and awarding either eternal life, or eternal damnation (equally awful concepts), is becoming increasingly unpalatable.
    But then we do have Jesus saying that God knows the number of the hairs on our heads, and will care for us more than the lilies of the field and the birds of the air.

    Of course, knowing that number isn't too much of a challenge for some heads. :wink:

  • Why is it necessary to love God? Citation above from Spinoza.
  • On the Errant Jesus thread I just provided @Blahblah with a list of imho excellent historical Jesus scholars (in case he might actually be interested). At the end of that list I mentioned that all those scholars are convinced that Jesus was into apocalyptic thinking. In that they are agreed. But there is strong disagreement about how Jesus regarded his death.

    Was he an atoning or a non atoning Jesus?
  • Nick Tamen wrote: »
    No, he isn't...

    I'm afraid the idea of a personal god, answering personal prayer, and awarding either eternal life, or eternal damnation (equally awful concepts), is becoming increasingly unpalatable.
    But then we do have Jesus saying that God knows the number of the hairs on our heads, and will care for us more than the lilies of the field and the birds of the air.

    Of course, knowing that number isn't too much of a challenge for some heads. :wink:

    Certainly true, in my case!

    Point taken, though. Perhaps I should been a bit more explicit, and said 'unpalatable to me'.

    Maybe, in the end, God/god does love us, and look after us. We won't know that until after death, I guess.
  • @Nick Tamen
    I think Jesus' conviction that the Father knows the number of the hairs on our heads and also the fall (death) of every little sparrow reflects something he experienced at his baptism, a sense of being totally known by God and totally claimed by his Spirit.

    But if the flesh and blood human Jesus were transported into our time, and came to know all that we now know about the vastness (and perhaps the seeming indifference?) of the universe, would he still make such claims?

    Would he say that God knows every atom of our body (knowing that there are more atoms in a glass of water than there are glasses of water in all the oceans of the earth) and would he say that God knows every grain of sand and every star (knowing that there are more stars in the universe than there are grains of sand on all the beaches of the world).

    Or would he throw up his hands and say, How silly!
  • Bishops FingerBishops Finger Shipmate
    edited September 2019
    Why is it necessary to love God? Citation above from Spinoza.

    Good question!

    Possibly in return for all he is perceived to have done for us? But that doesn't quite chime in with the rest of the citation, if love isn't reciprocated...
    :confused:


  • Nick Tamen wrote: »
    No, he isn't...

    I'm afraid the idea of a personal god, answering personal prayer, and awarding either eternal life, or eternal damnation (equally awful concepts), is becoming increasingly unpalatable.
    But then we do have Jesus saying that God knows the number of the hairs on our heads, and will care for us more than the lilies of the field and the birds of the air.

    Of course, knowing that number isn't too much of a challenge for some heads. :wink:
    Wishful thinking? A child's religion, the kind of belief system set up for Dawkins & kin to attack.

    Is some of the bible written as aspirational, hoped for, even as written as answers to our most heartfelt desires? It doesn't make it true. It makes it wanted and hoped for.

    On the Errant Jesus thread I just provided @Blahblah with a list of imho excellent historical Jesus scholars (in case he might actually be interested). At the end of that list I mentioned that all those scholars are convinced that Jesus was into apocalyptic thinking. In that they are agreed. But there is strong disagreement about how Jesus regarded his death.

    Was he an atoning or a non atoning Jesus?
    It does not matter. The belief one way or the other does not govern my current behaviour.

    What do you think of Spinoza's suggestion which I referenced above? "Spinoza told us that it is necessary to love God and to do what is right without ever expecting God to love us in return." Included in this "god love" is obviously the idea that God loves enough to do atonement.
  • @NOprophet_NØprofit

    I asked: Was he an atoning or a non atoning Jesus?

    You said: It does not matter. The belief one way or the other does not govern my current behaviour.

    I say:
    Then perhaps you will not like it, if /and or /when I return this thread to that theme which, after all, is the theme of the thread.
  • @NOprophet_NØprofit

    I asked: Was he an atoning or a non atoning Jesus?

    You said: It does not matter. The belief one way or the other does not govern my current behaviour.

    I say:
    Then perhaps you will not like it, if /and or /when I return this thread to that theme which, after all, is the theme of the thread.

    A theme which @NOprophet_NØprofit has addressed.

    As have I and others.

    He at-oned.
  • Nick Tamen wrote: »
    No, he isn't...

    I'm afraid the idea of a personal god, answering personal prayer, and awarding either eternal life, or eternal damnation (equally awful concepts), is becoming increasingly unpalatable.
    But then we do have Jesus saying that God knows the number of the hairs on our heads, and will care for us more than the lilies of the field and the birds of the air.

    Of course, knowing that number isn't too much of a challenge for some heads. :wink:
    Wishful thinking? A child's religion, the kind of belief system set up for Dawkins & kin to attack.

    Is some of the bible written as aspirational, hoped for, even as written as answers to our most heartfelt desires? It doesn't make it true. It makes it wanted and hoped for.
    Quite possibly to all of that. My only reason for mentioning that particular bit of the Gospels was the suggestion it seemed to me was being made that the modern idea that God loves all people personally doesn't seem to be found in the biblical Jesus.

  • Or in all incoming human experience.
  • Nick Tamen wrote: »
    No, he isn't...

    I'm afraid the idea of a personal god, answering personal prayer, and awarding either eternal life, or eternal damnation (equally awful concepts), is becoming increasingly unpalatable.
    But then we do have Jesus saying that God knows the number of the hairs on our heads, and will care for us more than the lilies of the field and the birds of the air.

    Of course, knowing that number isn't too much of a challenge for some heads. :wink:

    I resemble that remark.
Sign In or Register to comment.