Board index ‹ Jesus

[Tapioca]

Personally, I don't find much of what he does or says inspiring. I'm sure that's because I'm not a person from the time he lived, but neither are any of you.

By this point it's obvious that my values are different than most Christians. I think it's best explained by taking into account, for instance, how difficult the act of Jesus' sacrifice was for him versus how hard it would be for an average person. Not just in difficulty, but also expectation. For an average person to endure pain and suffering or to die protecting others is much more of a heroic act than a god taking human form and dying knowing he will rise again. Let's not even get into the reasons for this sacrifice in the first place.. or we can if you'd like.

Honestly I expect a lot of specific references to scripture but again, the difficulty to pass along knowledge or perform miracles isn't difficult for a god in human form. I might even get called out for asking a question just to debate the answers I'm given, but I'm not looking for a debate. Questioning answers is how you learn from them, not just taking them as truth at face value. I'm curious not just about the answers, but about how someone arrives at them as well.

[jimwalton]

I get really impressed by the wisdom of his answers when people ask him questions, or when they are trying to trap him. He says exactly the right thing. I wish I were so perceptive and wise.

I am also inspired by his consistency: he lives exactly by what he teaches. No hypocrisy, no putting on airs or false faces.

I'm inspired by his compassion for people. He honored women, he touched the sick, he welcomed children, and he had a particularly compassionate heart for anyone who was oppressed or outcast by society.

[Question]

> He says exactly the right thing.

That's because the Bible is written by authors telling stories. It's like saying Jack Bauer from the show 24 is so cool because he always says a really badass line after shooting his way through danger.

> he lives exactly by what he teaches.

Again, his followers definitely have an incentive to spread the GOOD word and not just an average one.

> I'm inspired by his compassion for people.

Well this is part of the reason for the success. He was one of them. A true underdog. A martyr. A God. Every ingredient necessary for the greatest story ever written.

[jimwalton]

> That's because the Bible is written by authors telling stories.

It seems you're implying the stories aren't true. It sounds like you've formed an opinion based on assumptions. On what basis do you assume they're not true? Do you have any evidence to that effect?

> Again, his followers definitely have an incentive to spread the GOOD word and not just an average one.

You're right that they have an incentive: They are convinced it's true. One irrefutable fact about this story: the disciples actually believed that Jesus lived and rose from the dead. There's no denying that. On that basis, they have great incentive to spread that word, even to their own detriment and danger. They had nothing to gain from spreading these stories except the knowledge that they were spreading something that was true.

[Scape211]

Questioning answers is how you learn from them, not just taking them as truth at face value. I'm curious not just about the answers, but about how someone arrives at them as well.

Totally agree and im glad you're curious. Many people dont even want to bother about this kind of conversation. They tend to think 'religion is all the same' or 'eh im a good person so thats spiritual enough. I juyts wont judge others for what they believe.' I can understand we dont want to judge, but if we become apathetic to exploring answers and seeking truth, we get in a really dangerous spot.

For an average person to endure pain and suffering or to die protecting others is much more of a heroic act than a god taking human form and dying knowing he will rise again. Let's not even get into the reasons for this sacrifice in the first place.. or we can if you'd like.

I can see this, but what amazes me more is someone who 1 - is God, but chooses to give that power up for a time to be a human and still becomes the perfect example of a human after giving all that away. 2 - Knows they will be killed brutally. This to me begs the question - when it is my time to die, do I want a quick death and just go to heaven? or do I want a slow and extremely painful death and come back to life? I would think I would choose the quick death, but thats all matter of opinion.

One other thing we should not forget is that Christ had always been in close contact with God. He regularly talked to him, connected with him, and since he was blameless, they were very close. However, during his final hours, when the pain was the worst and he had the weight of all sin on him, God left him. The sin was too great for God to be in his presence. Jesus probably knew that was coming, but it must have been hard to face just the same.

I think sometimes if we knew our fate we would do all we could to change it. Jesus wanted to change it as well since he asked God to in the garden. But, he knew he had to and was willing when the time came. No time traveling or butterfly effect stuff where Jesus attempts to change the outcome a million times, just accepting all the pain that had to come. Yes sacrificing yourself for others is heroic, but even heroes in those situations dont know the outcome for sure and do what they think is right. But to know the outcome; that you will lose/die horribly but still do it is heroic. Whether you are resurrected or not.

[Question]

> On what basis do you assume they're not true? Do you have any evidence to that effect?

I don't assume they're false, I just don't assume they're true. What evidence do you have, outside of the holy books, that any of their claims about god or heaven are true?

> One irrefutable fact about this story: the disciples actually believed that Jesus lived and rose from the dead. There's no denying that.

I am not convinced of their claims.

> They had nothing to gain from spreading these stories except the knowledge that they were spreading something that was true.

They were beggars who claimed to be the disciples of a martyred son of god. You're telling me that their lives wouldn't be any different if they didn't spread the stories than it was after they gained followers and donations for their cause and the churches?

[jimwalton]

> I don't assume they're false, I just don't assume they're true.

Your statement doesn't sound so innocently neutral ("That's because the Bible is written by authors telling stories."). It sounds as if you perceive the Gospel stories to be made up. So what's the truth about you—do you think the Gospel stories are fictional, or you still genuinely neutral?

> What evidence do you have, outside of the holy books, that any of their claims about god or heaven are true?

They've been corroborated by history and archaeology. They speak truth about the culture and its priorities and practices. They speak the truth about life (about the human condition, about relationships, about inner thoughts, about desires, about politics, about religion, and about evil). They write from the perspective of a historian, not a mythographer. With so many positive evidences of the writers' integrity, knowledge, and honesty, I am motivated to consider the truth of what they say about God and heaven.

> I am not convinced of their claims.

I understand that you're not convinced of what they're claiming, but you can't refute that they claimed it (which is my point). I wonder, however, if you are being closed-minded to the possibility and not giving them a fair hearing. Just wondering how objective you are in your consideration of their claims.

> They were beggars who claimed to be the disciples of a martyred son of god.

Correct, as long as we add "and resurrected" between "martyred" and "son of God." The resurrection was their main teaching.

> You're telling me that their lives wouldn't be any different if they didn't spread the stories than it was after they gained followers and donations for their cause and the churches?

• Paul was a rich, famous, and powerful Pharisee. After his conversion, he was persecuted, ridiculed, and probably martyred.
• James was a fisherman of reasonable economic stability. He was killed for his faith.
• Peter was a fisherman of reasonable economic stability. He was killed for his faith.

I'm definitely claiming that their lives were different based on their preaching of the resurrection.

Also, there is no evidence or reason to believe any of them became wealthy after their conversion. The donations they received and delivered were to help the people in Jerusalem during a famine.

[Question]

> do you think the Gospel stories are fictional, or you still genuinely neutral?

I'm not convinced they are true. To claim they are false I would need more information and some claims are unfalsifiable which means I can't accept them without evidence of their validity.

> I understand that you're not convinced of what they're claiming, but you can't refute that they claimed it (which is my point).

Anyone can claim anything. How objective are you in the consideration of someone's claim that they are a prophet now in the 21st century? Why do you doubt those who could possibly be the true son of God?

[jimwalton]

> I'm not convinced they are true. To claim they are false I would need more information and some claims are unfalsifiable which means I can't accept them without evidence of their validity.

Well, that's fair. My next question, then, would be to wonder how much study you've done to acquire that additional information and evaluate the claims.

> How objective are you in the consideration of someone's claim that they are a prophet now in the 21st century? Why do you doubt those who could possibly be the true son of God?

Doubting, asking questions, and evaluating are always wise courses of action. We need to be smart about stuff, not blindly accepting. Everything needs to be weighed against reality, logic, and evidence.