Jesus seems to be good moral teacher who wanted to uplift humanity but do you think he died because of fallacy?
Jesus was not a "good moral teacher", if what He taught was incorrect, or wrong.
One example is that He claimed He had the power to lay down His life, and take it up again, (resurrection). If He never rose from the dead, as you claim, He lied, and showed Himself to be a liar, and therefore immoral.
If He was true (which He was), then why do you not believe Him?
@aka-dj thats the whole point....jesus was not liar but himself victim of false belief...there are many example of jesus like people who died because they believed with full conviction but what they believed was false...worst example would be muhammad atta...he believed he would get heaven!!!!!!!!!!!!....so dying for something one is convinced of doesnot make that person a liar but person who believes in something which isnt true....that is what even jesus became victim of....
He was NO victim.
But thanks for trying to protect Him.
He is LORD of all creation, and He lives!!!
Halleluia! He lives!!!
he lives is statement of faith without proof...many in many belief system still live...
So by fallacy, I think you just mean a false premise. With that, i would tend to agree.
I think you are correct that many people have acted on false beliefs and caused destruction as a result. For example, the 9/11 terrorists believed they were fighting a holy war, when in fact they were just killing innocent people.
Yes, and most atheists will lump every believer in God in with these lunatic suicide kamikaze terrorists!
No. Just because you are a Christian, it does not follow you are going to do something like that; but the dictates of your religion require you to deny advancements in scientific understanding that contradict Holy Scripture, e.g. evolution, homosexuality, and (possibly) climate change.
Some Christians just take an easier route and aren't literalists, thereby avoid the problem altogether; but for fundamentalists, these issues are definitely troublesome.
@sooner never mind science has always had won in end...one cant stop people from accepting fact just because bunch of creative writers wrote some book 2k yrs back....
I hope so. But if society every breaks down and the Church takes power again the way it did in the Dark Ages, the result would be much the same.
Bible hasn't reached 2,000 years old yet...it's barely 1,700 years old. I find it funny though that there are so many Christian literalists when even the early Church historian Eusebius (260-340CE) stated that the New Testament was taken from the Essens. The exact quote from him is "the Gospels of the New Testament were really the old dramatic books of the Essens, from the pre-Christian days."
thanks for the info, people are so reluctant to let us know the truth about religious basics and foundation. Everybody else and everything else is suspicious but they are clean and clear... it should ring a bell somewhere.
He died because religious power was one of the strongest and longest lasting power because it allows you to control people's thoughts, words and actions. When the people who had the politico religious power discovered what he was doing and saying, it meant he asked people to submit to a different power and invest in another religion, they killed him to keep the power, quiet him...anybody knows now that when you kill the messenger you make the message more powerful!
ha ha ha ha ha ha ha--sorry for laughing but i am just laughing just bcz you using two people christ and mohammad atta for same example--- and it seems that you believe in so much what bible writer wrote--dear christ is much above then the imaginations of humans, and god-like persones comes in this world just to set examples for us,he was a great example of mearcy,he wants to teach us mearcy for eachother,unconditional love for eachother,and we are talking this as a story,,the whole story was created by chriest itself,he could give any twiest to that story if he wanted to,but he showed what his motive was---
yes i am using jesus and muhammad atta for same example...but m i comparing characters?....no...i am comparing good with worst but both have 1 thing in common , dying for conviction....that is what my point was...jesus died , many did before him and even today people die...but dying reflects sincerity towards ones conviction not necessarily truthness of their belief....
okey...but again i am telling you death has no mean for christ-like people,they use these type of curcumstances for setting an example in front of human,...and if we talking about false or true..then it can be so confusing..bcz how can someone prove that what is actually false belife or true belife,bcz everybuddy has their own belife and perception.so if we makes any statement about anything that also limits by our own belife and perceptions..,for knowing the real truth we have to go beyond our mental conditioning....
@favorite ur last point is valid but ur starting point begins with again mental conditioning.."i am telling you death has no mean for christ-like people,they use these type of curcumstances for setting an example in front of human ----- now that is interpretation of us ...who knows what jesus actually thought...what we know about jesus is from bible which jesus himself didn't write...whosoever wrote , wrote their version , their perception , their interpretation....
yup...you are totally right here that "who knows what jesus actually thought" and here also you are right that " jesus not right the bible"
and here i am not telling this just bcz that i believe in bible..bcz i never read bible in my life, but i came to this thinking after reading imance stuff and after knowing many god-like people...they can be jesus..buddha..krishna..aur many others..and whatever writers tells them about their life and about their motives..but one thing is clear that they all were above the birth and death...and they all were "self-realised" persons,
and i can say only one things that..these self realised people never does wrong things..they always have the right reasons for things :-)
and what is the extrem truth..i cant say and nither you can say..bcz we both dont know the real truth.. we can only know the idea of truth,but that is just an idea not the truth .
sorry for my english-- it was "jesus not wrote the bible" instead of "jesus right the bible
better throw out shakespeare, the oddesy, and every other text as lies too then.. the Bible has more credible accurate copies than all of them.... lol
Have fun though.
Jesus died because that was God's plan altogether. He sent his son to earth for the purpose of that very thing. He had a great plan to send his son to die for our sins on the cross and rise again just to show the world what he said about rising again and those who believe will be with him in eternity. We will see him again because to be absent from the body is to be present with him. His word says so. The Jews who wanted Baraba let loose instead of Jesus was also God's plan. They we used by God to play the part. Even Judas was used by God to betray Jesus.
@boni thats what bible writers wrote....
Talk about rewriting history. "Oh yeah, God meant that to happen" Hindsight is 20/20 for biblical authors.
So, God put on a magic show and people swallowed hook, line and sinker.
Thus there is no free-will and your entire Religion is a lie based on what you just said. Good job in proving the point of others.
Hindsight? Jesus fullfilled prophecy ! What He did, saved us ALL.
What ever you say. If the Bible were rewritten today, they'd work in the part about Satan burying the dinosaur bones to test our faith.
Is that a joke? The book of Job contains descriptions of dino's...
Anyone that denies it is lying to themselves.
And Noah gathered up 50,000 different beetles and put them in his ark.
You know, I like peanuts that grow from the ground, but you really give these legumes a bad name and sound! Maybe you should have went with the user name "tree nuts" instead, as you might have then been protected from that flood that you think never existed but did; ha-ha!
You don't really help your argument with ridiculous statements like this, just FYI.
As for the main question, I disagree that the rabbi who became the basis for the Jesus story died because of fallacy. I think Yeshua3 knew what he was doing when he attacked the temple in Jerusalem, and was well aware that it was a capital offense that would likely lead to his eventual and very public martyrdom. He probably saw it as the best way to ensure that his story long outlived him.
If this indeed was his plan, I think we can agree that it worked - it certainly gave his apocalyptic cult a ton of publicity that the other apocalyptic cults of the time simply couldn't compete with, and is the main reason why it's still around today.
Yea, the whole Christians burning pretty much any book that was not the bible for around 1,000 years played no part in Christianity surviving as the main religion today.
@scottcgruber: Have you ever heard of something called "reciprocation of the notion" ... ? Surely, you can figure out the rest... *sigh*
Um as far as "And Noah gathered up 50,000 different beetles and put them in his ark."
It does not say that Noah "gathered" anything.It says that they just "went". into the ark.
Gen 7:15 And they went in unto Noah into the ark, two and two of all flesh, wherein is the breath of life.
At least 50 thousand species of beetles might fit on the ark. According to Vector, Noah had to cram at least 700 species of dinosaurs on that boat too.
"the length of the ark 300 cubits, its breadth 50 cubits, and its height 30 cubits" (Genesis 6:14 - 16)
A cubit is the length of elbow to finger-tips.
For the sake of argument well go ahead and error on the side of remotely possible (and more easily multiplied) and make Noah a mountain of a man. We'll give him a 24 inch cubit. (The Egyptian cubit-the longest mentioned anywhere else in the bible was 20.6 inches)
So... okay that gives us a boat that is 7200 inches (600 feet) long, 1200 inches (100 feet) wide and 720 inches (60 feet) tall.
Okay, so that's a pretty big boat. Made out of wood. So it's a wicked heavy boat too.
Now lets talk about Sauropods. Just Sauropods for now. Argentinosaurus was 120 feet long and 100 tons. We'll go ahead and assume that they were unclean... so only one pair was necessary. It's little cousin... the Sauroposeidon was 100 feet long and weight a mere 60 tons. The Futalognkosaurus was smack in the middle of that weighing in at around 80 tons and around 110 feet in length. I would drag out the measurements on every species but I will say that if you put the 10 biggest species of SAUROPODS on a boat (by twos) They would weigh around 1300 tons and you would have to stack them on top of each other for deck space... (Forget the hold, it isn't tall enough)
Then if you add the ten heaviest theropods (T-rex shaped) then you would add an additional 200 tons of weight. The good news is they would fit in the hold...just barely...
So right now we have around 1500 tons (That's 3 million pounds for those keeping track) of lizard on a wooden boat that's 60 feet tall. From 20 mating pairs of dinosaurs.
But wait... now we'll throw in the ten biggest species of ceratopsians (triceratops like dinos) They range from 23-30 feet in length and add another 200 tons.
30 species of just dinosaurs... Three and a half million pounds.
The real fun begins when you start trying to stuff the rest of the dinosaurs and all the other animals on board.
It's a good thing that all the water in the world would only global flood land to a depth of a couple centimeters... cause that's about the only way the the ark ain't sinking.
@MelissaBarrett now bible authors didnt knew dinosaurs ever existed...forget bible authors , even jesus didnt knew about it....so how can they write something which they are unaware of?....if noah's story would have been written today , may be bible authors would have gone for 100 feet tall building with all facilities till flood ends...
Vector said none of that. Thanks for the lies.
I said the flood killed the dinos. Any more lies about what I said?
You sure have a lot of measurements for things not listed as being on the ark. Maybe you should post scripture up to verify your claim..
Or did you fabricate those too? I don't see any of what you posted alive anyway so apparently they didn't float on a boat.. apparently they died. And the water used to be above your head, no different than ozone, and earthquakes make for really deep dive zones .... The oxygen levels and air density were much higher prior to the flood because of it.. You don't seem to have studied any of what YOUR scientists tell you do you? Except for that word evolution that's still a theory.
Your numbers for dinosaurs that DIED, and lies about what i said are about as factual as calling balloons rocks just because they're grey.....
Um... if the dinosaurs were killed in the flood then how did the supposed references to dinosaurs happen in Job? Just asking. Or there are other verses that the new earthers claim to mean dinosaurs?
And you can get all defensive as much as you want... Considering the impression that you have given me with your posts calling me a liar is actually a complement... I mean with what you consider as truth.
Get defensive? Yes, that is correct. To defend one's self against a lie is to be [verb] defensive. It is required to 'defend'...
And I didn't call you a liar, which is another stretch of something I stated.. But everyone in fact is in some degree a liar. Tell me you have never lied and I'll be laughing about it at gatherings for the rest of my life..
I siad you lied, and you did at that. What you claimed I said or implied was incorrect as I never said nor implied it, therefore it is a lie. And yes, I will correct it if it is a lie about me.
Not being ugly, just being straight. I don't play fake. What you see is me, no butter cover for popularity.
Job, was written before Genesis. It is extremely old.
And the descriptions are undoubtedly dinosaurs. Anyone claiming otherwise has literacy comprehension issues. Not criticism, just being straight again.
It tells of dinosaurs, which died in the flood.
With the [scientific] facts that I have researched and found that fit, I TRULY believe that if people searched 'genuinely' and weren't critical of God's Word, The Holy Bible, they would see Him and the truth of His existence as well and obviously as I do.
They don't believe simply because God isn't striking them dead when they speak His name in vain or showing His face WHEN they demand it or HOW they demand it.
But they think it's impossible for God to have a full record of every deed and thought.. It's SOOO not..
He can see your entire life just like you can recall every step you took yesterday to make your cheese sandwich..
Which means all the people saying "Hell can't exist, I can't believe in that.. That's impossible." They won't have to believe if they keep pushing away God's life saver.. They are going to drown and blame God for being in Hell after they pushed His help away for years and years and years thousands of times and He can recall every one in an instant.
He doesn't put people there... He throws a raft over and over, they push it away, and choose to drown.. They choose not to search for the help, and just deny it because they don't like it.
The ostrich can stuff his head in the sand all he likes because the thought is horrible....
When the lion gets to him though, he's still going to be lunch, even if it is horrible and he can't believe it anymore.. ::plop:: head in sand.. ::crunch:: still got ate.
The more I tell people of Hell, the farther down their head goes......
But God didn't put their head in the sand. He warned them and saved them.
They choose what they get. If God MADE them accept Jesus THENN and ONLY THEN could they claim they don't have free will.
Thanks for the sermon... I was wondering when I would get one today...
I don't care in what order the books were written in... the events in Job happened after the events in Genesis. So one doesn't say what you think it does or one is incorrect.
Look I don't care what you believe... just pointing out the logical fallacies.
Call me a liar if you like... (which you both admitted to and denied in the same response) I also don't care. Once again, if what you think is the truth is what you judge truth by, I'm happy to be a liar
And yes, I have lied and probably will lie again. I do, however, try to avoid lying to myself. You should try it sometimes.
pointing the finger with dramatic sarcasm..
I understand your reasoning now.. searching for 'fallacies'...
One can make anything questionable. Shedding doubt is no great feat.
And you did lie. And that is what I said you did. Lie.
Have a good one
Maybe you could have disputed something I said? No? Didn't think so.
And for the lying thing: Just because you can't back up something you said doesn't make ME the one lying.
On a completely separate subject... I sure do hope that God cures loons of insanity before he lets them in heaven... or maybe the insane just get a one way trip to hell.
And just a few questions:
Biblically, please name the verse where God instructs Noah to leave all the dinosaurs behind. (And woolly mammoths as well while we're at it)
Cause this is how it goes:
19 And of every living thing of all flesh, two of every sort shalt thou bring into the ark, to keep them alive with thee; they shall be male and female.
20 Of fowls after their kind, and of cattle after their kind, of every creeping thing of the earth after his kind, two of every sort shall come unto thee, to keep them alive.
21 And take thou unto thee of all food that is eaten, and thou shalt gather it to thee; and it shall be for food for thee, and for them.
22 Thus did Noah; according to all that God commanded him, so did he.
I didn't see anything about "except dinosaurs that is Noah... oh and woolly mammoths" As a matter of fact, God was pretty specific. "EVERY LIVING THING OF ALL FLESH"
2. Could you please post references to the "Dinousars in the bible" thing. Cause the only thing that you could mean is in Job 40:15-24
3. Going on the Job reference, dinosaurs existed after the flood because the events in Job happened after the flood... including the sighting of the "behemoth".
The way I see it, that means that
1. Dinosaurs were on the Ark... which they couldn't have been because they simply wouldn't fit.
2. God didn't say what Genesis says he says (So the book is obviously incomplete... at the least)
3. Job was describing a beast that wasn't a dinosaur. Which means their are no biblical references to dinosaurs at all. If the world is only as old as the bible says it is... you would think that SOMEWHERE in the bible would be reference to a 100 ton lizard. Also, since we actually have the bones... something needs to account for that. Oh, it also means you were lying in your statement about dinosaurs being talked about in the bible.
Am I missing any other possibilities?
If you fail to address any of these points and simply choose to call names go for it. I'll assume it means that you either have discovered that you were wrong about the scriptures or that the scriptures themselves are wrong... For your sanity I would suggest option 1.
I'm popping my two cents in again lol
There is a lot of speculation going here and there is no proof of what is being said.
I could also speculate and say that maybe Noah took baby dinosaurs on the ark but we were not there,we do not know what took place.
There are some things that are just a mystery that we may never know.
I could also speculate that Job is referring to some kind of hippopotamus or whatever a Nile horse is.
In form a plural of H929, but really a singular of Egyptian derivation: a water ox, that is, the hippopotamus or Nile horse: - Behemoth.
Or maybe some sort of cattle?
From an unused root (probably meaning to be mute); properly a dumb beast; especially any large quadruped or animal (often collectively): - beast, cattle.
The point is we don't know.
Just like unicorn in Num 23:22,24:8,Job 39:9,Psa_29:6,92:10
Is it really a unicorn as we know them or....just a wild bull?
רם רים ראים ראם
re'êm re'êym rêym rêm
reh-ame', reh-ame', rame, rame
From H7213; a wild bull (from its conspicuousness): - unicorn.
We can only speculate.
That was sort of the point. I don't care, really, what anyone believes personally. It makes for interesting conversation at times but I'm not going to go out of my way to prove the Bible (or really any other religious text) wrong... unless (and this is big) someone goes out of their way to try to discount others by using the bible...
As such the statement:
"Is that a joke? The book of Job contains descriptions of dino's...
Anyone that denies it is lying to themselves."
Is just self-righteous enough for me to ask for an explanation... any explanation really... of their claims.
In this case there isn't one. Not scientifically and not Biblical. The poster cannot present anything that makes any sense from any source... which is also fine, I guess, if he isn't implying that those who don't see it his way are in denial or lying to themselves.
If he would have said "I believe that Job has dino descriptions" and left it at that, I would have been fine. I would have thought he was wrong, but that's that.
And just for the record, most biblical scholars believe that Job was talking about either an elephant or a hippo... And the context he was speaking in, btw, was a poem.
Nor do I think that the problem with believably here lies with the Bible so much as the person interpreting it.
I know people can get heated and frustrated when debating such things, myself included.
Job is taken out of context a lot and misinterpreted a lot.
I'm not preaching to you here but this may help defuse some of the issue.
Job 40:17 says,
"He moveth his tail like a cedar"
People misinterpret/misunderstand that as the tail is as BIG as a cedar.
It does not say that the tail is as big as a cedar.
It moves like one..maybe like how the wind blows through a cedar tree,swaying.
look, i never said I was certain the dinos didn't go on the ark..
quit puttin words in my mouth just once?
I said that is what "I" said is they died in the flood because you were telling people what "I" said - but what you said was NOT what "I" said. they could've died anytime, i just said what makes sense to me. He could've put newborn dinos on the ark and baby everything else for that matter pretaining to their size.
and your smart remarks are one of the reasons i'm done here.
wanna do nothing BUT shed doubt, do it by yourself, and if you speak of me or what i say speak to me or quote me?
Thank you, Melissa. I wish you posted more frequently. You are one of my favorite commentators. I post largely for the same reason that you do... when I see an egregious fallacy, I can't help but correct it.
Literal interpretations towards any type of symbolic verbiage, always leads to confusion. It sort of reminds me of when some people are too dumb to understand sarcasm, for example. Not that you are, just saying...
Jesus died because he was a human being. I personally find the idea that Jesus took my sin unto himself. I'm a big boy, and if I've gotten booted to hell, then I probably deserve it. If you can't do the time.... I am responsible for me, and no one need to sacrifice themselves for me. What does others taking the rap for you, and you letting them, say for you? If heaven is full of those folks, then I really don't want to go there.
It is important to study how the book came to be, not only the words written in it, to understand it completely. We should thank Martin Luther for his works, without him we may still have to go to a priest and have him translate it for us.
There are currently around 50 authors for the bible. Martin Luther translated as best he could what had already be re-written many times over. It has been re-written again and again since he translated it. I think we should thank no one as we have no original copy of the work outside of what the Vatican has deemed ok for us to read and study..which could easily be faked yet again. We will never know.
You're arguing against scholars that spent their life doing work in only that field?
What is your profession?
I have found that much like an uncle of mine, you read only what you want to read and skip over everything else in order to attempt to argue things which you really don't know.
To give just an example, I'm sure you heard of the Apocrypha. They were excavated by the united states and while the guy who found them was working on deciphering them, the Vatican came in and took them. The only translations we currently have of them are what the Vatican has felt ok to release. Am I arguing against scholars? No, I'm arguing against blatant stupidity. Which is exactly what it is if you think the people who have had the power over Christianity for over 1,000 years are going to translate any documents correctly and then hand them over to the public. They spent thousands of years, and thousands of lives, destroying other religions, their scrolls, and most of the books the world possessed so that no one would have a leg to stand on against them. I'm no where near stupid, nor am I blind or deaf, nor do I refuse to actually put in the hard work and study myself to learn the things that happened.
We have gone around before about you attacking people. Once again you present not the slightest bit of evidence of anything and you go for directly attacking me. Once again, I'm not the only person that you see fit to do this to. Unfortunately for you, not everyone who disagrees with you is some majorly flawed person for you to over throw. Nor are we liars or stupid. Just because we would rather use our brains and learn instead of letting it sit and rot or be filled with a bunch of bs we never found out for ourselves, does not mean in any way shape or form that we are stupid. I do not consider you to be a stupid person at all, though you do seem to be full of hate and seem to have a need to take it out on all that don't agree with you. If you don't have anything to actually add to what someone says, or you don't have any evidence of what someone is saying is wrong, then perhaps you should just not respond.
As for arguing against scholars, I'm actually agreeing with them. They have shown, using the Ecclesiastical Histories kept by the church, that they have been allowed to obtain and read, that falsifying things was the common practice of the Church. They re-wrote the bible themselves as many times as they saw fit to do so. They changed what they thought needed to be changed in order to better suit their cause. So no, I'm not arguing against the scholars, I'm agreeing with them. If you had bothered to even do a little research before making such and absurd post, you would've known that.
My goodness man..
I won't reply anymore sensitive Sam.
You people and your lies.. I attacked NO ONE...
Now you'll shoot off 'wow, how Christian you are'..
for laughing at dramatization? yes, it's funny..
I didn't attack you.
It was meant to prove a point. The answer is non-specific rhetorical..
You aren't a pro in the field, yet you speak like you consider yourself one.
now, seeing as I'm an evil demon attacking you with my point..
by Claire Evans11 months ago
We hear often of atheists claiming that have looked for evidence of God but can find none but what would convince them? How do they go about investigating? How do they expect believers to prove it to them when it can...
by hinazille5 years ago
This is a common belief amongst Christians, but a few questions arise...what about the individuals that lived before Jesus' arrival on Earth?if Jesus died for your sins, then whats the motivation to do good deeds in...
by Disappearinghead3 years ago
.......in terms of behaviours and activities?I've just read a hub by someone talking about the old Chestnut that not all who call themselves Christian are going to heaven citing Jesus "Not all who cry Lord will...
by Thom Carnes2 months ago
I was talking to a couple of nice friendly neighborhood Jehovah's Witnesses yesterday (there's a Kingdom Hall just around the corner from where I live so I tend to get them quite frequently) and we eventually got on to...
by A Thousand Words3 years ago
Does anyone else find it curious that Jesus only appeared to His disciples and those closest to Him (family/intimate friends) after He was "raised from the dead?" If He came for the Jews and was supposed to be...
by Antecessor6 years ago
Did jesus have a penis?Did jesus ever get stiff or was he divinely impotent?Did jesus have balls with semen in them?Did semen ever come from his balls out of his penis from say wet dreams?If not, then how did the semen...
Copyright © 2017 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.