SO WHERE WAS CHRIST (YESHUA) IN OUR FESTIVITIES?

[Ainsley Harriott]

A: You said that there is a red ball in that box

GOD HAS SPOKEN

[Gofer Blue]

TBG - In reply to this comment by the poster Calon Lan: "TBG at no point denies the existence of the historical Jesus", you said: Thank you for your observation. I find it deeply worrying that some of my detractors in this thread imagine things in their heads as opposed to what is written on the page.

Now you state that you don't you believe in the existence of an historical Jesus, in which case why did you not correct Calon Lan?

I think you need to let this one go.

I think you are right as TBG is clearly not going to answer this one. It's like me saying at no point did I deny the existence of Queen Elizabeth the Second. What does that tell you about my belief in the existence of Queen Elizabeth the Second?

Whether or not you wish to elaborate on your understanding of Jesus Christ is up to you but my greatest wish is that you would come to know and follow Jesus as I have done, remembering that I too came from a very sceptical position.

[Colon Man]

TBG - In reply to this comment by the poster Calon Lan: "TBG at no point denies the existence of the historical Jesus", you said: Thank you for your observation. I find it deeply worrying that some of my detractors in this thread imagine things in their heads as opposed to what is written on the page.

Now you state that you don't you believe in the existence of an historical Jesus, in which case why did you not correct Calon Lan?

I think you need to let this one go.

I think you are right as TBG is clearly not going to answer this one. It's like me saying at no point did I deny the existence of Queen Elizabeth the Second. What does that tell you about my belief in the existence of Queen Elizabeth the Second?

The answer was that there was nothing to correct in Calon Lan's statement as I did not deny the existence of Jesus (something that was repeated in my subsequent responses if you ever care to actually read what I have written as opposed to what you think I have written).

I'm not going to answer for TBG here but my own belief is that there was a person called Jesus on whom the 50 or so gospels are based. As all those gospels, including the four which made the final cut, contradict each other to a greater or lesser degree, at most one of them, but more likely none of them, can be completely accurate. I believe therefore in Jesus, as I believe, in Mohammed, the Buddha, and Socrates. That is not to say that I believe the accounts of them are accurate. But don't interchange 'Jesus' with 'Christ'; they may be interchangeable for you but they are not for most people.

[Gofer Blue]

Thank you for a straightforward response.

[Colon Man]

Thank you for a straightforward response.

You're welcome. But I don't expect or necessarily want people to believe the same things that I do.

[Taunton Blue Genie]

TBG - In reply to this comment by the poster Calon Lan: "TBG at no point denies the existence of the historical Jesus", you said: Thank you for your observation. I find it deeply worrying that some of my detractors in this thread imagine things in their heads as opposed to what is written on the page.

Now you state that you don't you believe in the existence of an historical Jesus, in which case why did you not correct Calon Lan?

I think you need to let this one go.

I think you are right as TBG is clearly not going to answer this one. It's like me saying at no point did I deny the existence of Queen Elizabeth the Second. What does that tell you about my belief in the existence of Queen Elizabeth the Second?

The answer was that there was nothing to correct in Calon Lan's statement as I did not deny the existence of Jesus (something that was repeated in my subsequent responses if you ever care to actually read what I have written as opposed to what you think I have written).

By the way, do you think that you would be a Christian if you were brought up in a small village in Saudi Arabia in a 100% Muslim environment?

[truthpaste]

TBG - In reply to this comment by the poster Calon Lan: "TBG at no point denies the existence of the historical Jesus", you said: Thank you for your observation. I find it deeply worrying that some of my detractors in this thread imagine things in their heads as opposed to what is written on the page.

Now you state that you don't you believe in the existence of an historical Jesus, in which case why did you not correct Calon Lan?

I think you need to let this one go.

I think you are right as TBG is clearly not going to answer this one. It's like me saying at no point did I deny the existence of Queen Elizabeth the Second. What does that tell you about my belief in the existence of Queen Elizabeth the Second?

The answer was that there was nothing to correct in Calon Lan's statement as I did not deny the existence of Jesus (something that was repeated in my subsequent responses if you ever care to actually read what I have written as opposed to what you think I have written).

Please take a step back and try to understand that, hitherto, I have not made a statement as to whether Jesus existed or not. For some very strange reason you keep imaging that I have - and you have made accusations that I have said things that I plainly did not.

Result!

[Colon Man]

TBG - In reply to this comment by the poster Calon Lan: "TBG at no point denies the existence of the historical Jesus", you said: Thank you for your observation. I find it deeply worrying that some of my detractors in this thread imagine things in their heads as opposed to what is written on the page.

Now you state that you don't you believe in the existence of an historical Jesus, in which case why did you not correct Calon Lan?

I think you need to let this one go.

I think you are right as TBG is clearly not going to answer this one. It's like me saying at no point did I deny the existence of Queen Elizabeth the Second. What does that tell you about my belief in the existence of Queen Elizabeth the Second?

The answer was that there was nothing to correct in Calon Lan's statement as I did not deny the existence of Jesus (something that was repeated in my subsequent responses if you ever care to actually read what I have written as opposed to what you think I have written).

Please take a step back and try to understand that, hitherto, I have not made a statement as to whether Jesus existed or not. For some very strange reason you keep imaging that I have - and you have made accusations that I have said things that I plainly did not.

As for your analogy, I am glad you have brought it up as you might just eventually understand. If you do not deny something you aren't confirming the existence of it. A more apt example would life on other planets: if I do not state that life exists on other planets in a thread it doesn't mean that I stated on here that I do indeed believe that life exists on other planets - and vice versa. You do not seem to grasp this simple concept when putting forth your fabrications.

What denominations of Christianity? What do you think about Catholics? And, of course, can you give us the citation for the statistic you present above? Thanks.

[Taunton Blue Genie]

TBG - In reply to this comment by the poster Calon Lan: "TBG at no point denies the existence of the historical Jesus", you said: Thank you for your observation. I find it deeply worrying that some of my detractors in this thread imagine things in their heads as opposed to what is written on the page.

Now you state that you don't you believe in the existence of an historical Jesus, in which case why did you not correct Calon Lan?

I think you need to let this one go.

I think you are right as TBG is clearly not going to answer this one. It's like me saying at no point did I deny the existence of Queen Elizabeth the Second. What does that tell you about my belief in the existence of Queen Elizabeth the Second?

The answer was that there was nothing to correct in Calon Lan's statement as I did not deny the existence of Jesus (something that was repeated in my subsequent responses if you ever care to actually read what I have written as opposed to what you think I have written).

Please take a step back and try to understand that, hitherto, I have not made a statement as to whether Jesus existed or not. For some very strange reason you keep imaging that I have - and you have made accusations that I have said things that I plainly did not.

As for your analogy, I am glad you have brought it up as you might just eventually understand. If you do not deny something you aren't confirming the existence of it. A more apt example would life on other planets: if I do not state that life exists on other planets in a thread it doesn't mean that I stated on here that I do indeed believe that life exists on other planets - and vice versa. You do not seem to grasp this simple concept when putting forth your fabrications.

More people watch The X-Factor than University Challenge. By the way, you never seemed to get around to responding to my disputing your blasphemy statement. Do you stand by it or is Wikipedia wrong?

[Gofer Blue]

Thank you for a straightforward response.

You're welcome. But I don't expect or necessarily want people to believe the same things that I do.

I don't EXPECT them to either; but I would WANT them to, because the world would be a heck of a better place if everyone followed Jesus (or even the Jesus way if they cannot accept his divinity).

[Gofer Blue]

1. Adam, Eve and the talking snake in the Garden of Eden: this event is recorded in the first book of the Old Testament so I still tend to be a bit sceptical as to whether they were factual events or not as there is a lot of poetic language used in the OT. Whether you believe in evolution or not, my take on this is that there had to be a first human being who became truly self-aware, recognised the difference between good and evil and realised that he/she could make a choice either way yet whilst instinctively having a conscience (whether recognising that this came from God or not) and therefore should choose to do good. A&E chose not to do so and so the rot set in. As for the snake, well if God is omnipotent then he can do anything of course!
2. The Virgin Birth - yes
3. The feeding of the Five Thousand - yes
4. The turning of water into wine - yes
5. Jesus walking on water - yes
6. Balaam's talking donkey: sounds highly implausible doesn't it and yet it is recorded?
7. Joshua stopping the sun (or, knowing what we know about astronomy now, was it really a case of stopping the Earth?): sounds highly implausible doesn't it and yet it is recorded?
8. The universe being created in six days if God is omnipotent, well....(as above).
9. Jesus raising Lazarus from the dead - yes
10. Moses parting the Red Sea - yes

The common denominator in all the above things is the high degree of improbability but because an event is highly improbable does this mean that it can't happen?

I'm surprised you did not include the Resurrection. To be honest this is far more important to my faith then any of the others in your list. If anyone can demonstrate that the Resurrection was not an actual event then my faith would be meaningless.

If I was born in Saudi Arabia, no, I would not expect to be brought up as a Christian. However by the time I became mature I would certainly be questioning the faith I was brought up in whatever that faith might be!

[crazyhorse]

Thank you for a straightforward response.

You're welcome. But I don't expect or necessarily want people to believe the same things that I do.

I don't EXPECT them to either; but I would WANT them to, because the world would be a heck of a better place if everyone followed Jesus (or even the Jesus way if they cannot accept his divinity).

Would it be safer to follow Jesus or no one?

[Taunton Blue Genie]

1. Adam, Eve and the talking snake in the Garden of Eden: this event is recorded in the first book of the Old Testament so I still tend to be a bit sceptical as to whether they were factual events or not as there is a lot of poetic language used in the OT. Whether you believe in evolution or not, my take on this is that there had to be a first human being who became truly self-aware, recognised the difference between good and evil and realised that he/she could make a choice either way yet whilst instinctively having a conscience (whether recognising that this came from God or not) and therefore should choose to do good. A&E chose not to do so and so the rot set in. As for the snake, well if God is omnipotent then he can do anything of course!

As to your comment about being sceptical about the Adam and Eve story does that mean that it not fact but mere folklore?

[Colon Man]

1. Adam, Eve and the talking snake in the Garden of Eden: this event is recorded in the first book of the Old Testament so I still tend to be a bit sceptical as to whether they were factual events or not as there is a lot of poetic language used in the OT. Whether you believe in evolution or not, my take on this is that there had to be a first human being who became truly self-aware, recognised the difference between good and evil and realised that he/she could make a choice either way yet whilst instinctively having a conscience (whether recognising that this came from God or not) and therefore should choose to do good. A&E chose not to do so and so the rot set in. As for the snake, well if God is omnipotent then he can do anything of course!

I just wonder why an omnipotent god needs to rely on all that symbolism in order to save mankind, which he keeps failing to do.

[Gofer Blue]

1. Adam, Eve and the talking snake in the Garden of Eden: this event is recorded in the first book of the Old Testament so I still tend to be a bit sceptical as to whether they were factual events or not as there is a lot of poetic language used in the OT. Whether you believe in evolution or not, my take on this is that there had to be a first human being who became truly self-aware, recognised the difference between good and evil and realised that he/she could make a choice either way yet whilst instinctively having a conscience (whether recognising that this came from God or not) and therefore should choose to do good. A&E chose not to do so and so the rot set in. As for the snake, well if God is omnipotent then he can do anything of course!

2. The Virgin Birth - yes

Re: A&E: I have already explained my interpretation as above. I wouldn't call it folklore, no.

[Gofer Blue]

What do you mean by "he keeps failing to do"?

[Taunton Blue Genie]

1. Adam, Eve and the talking snake in the Garden of Eden: this event is recorded in the first book of the Old Testament so I still tend to be a bit sceptical as to whether they were factual events or not as there is a lot of poetic language used in the OT. Whether you believe in evolution or not, my take on this is that there had to be a first human being who became truly self-aware, recognised the difference between good and evil and realised that he/she could make a choice either way yet whilst instinctively having a conscience (whether recognising that this came from God or not) and therefore should choose to do good. A&E chose not to do so and so the rot set in. As for the snake, well if God is omnipotent then he can do anything of course!

2. The Virgin Birth - yes

3. The feeding of the Five Thousand - yes

I don't have to ask myself anything as it's all about your belief system. You totally believe in some things written in the Bible and and have doubts about others. If it's not all truth where do you draw the line? If you admit that some of the stories are 'poetic' (if you do not wish to use the word 'folklore') how do you know for sure what is fact and what is 'poetic'? What analysis do you adopt to separate one from another? My lay preacher friend has left many churches as he draws a different line in the sand regarding this matter to the incumbent preachers. What evidence is there that the universe was created in 6 days, for example? Isn't it true that believers differ as to what they believe is literal truth and what is allegory?

[Baloo]

1. Adam, Eve and the talking snake in the Garden of Eden: this event is recorded in the first book of the Old Testament so I still tend to be a bit sceptical as to whether they were factual events or not as there is a lot of poetic language used in the OT. Whether you believe in evolution or not, my take on this is that there had to be a first human being who became truly self-aware, recognised the difference between good and evil and realised that he/she could make a choice either way yet whilst instinctively having a conscience (whether recognising that this came from God or not) and therefore should choose to do good. A&E chose not to do so and so the rot set in. As for the snake, well if God is omnipotent then he can do anything of course!

2. The Virgin Birth - yes

3. The feeding of the Five Thousand - yes

Is the reason you believe really because you can't think of a reason people would have made this stuff up?

[Taunton Blue Genie]

1. Adam, Eve and the talking snake in the Garden of Eden: this event is recorded in the first book of the Old Testament so I still tend to be a bit sceptical as to whether they were factual events or not as there is a lot of poetic language used in the OT. Whether you believe in evolution or not, my take on this is that there had to be a first human being who became truly self-aware, recognised the difference between good and evil and realised that he/she could make a choice either way yet whilst instinctively having a conscience (whether recognising that this came from God or not) and therefore should choose to do good. A&E chose not to do so and so the rot set in. As for the snake, well if God is omnipotent then he can do anything of course!

2. The Virgin Birth - yes

3. The feeding of the Five Thousand - yes

4. The turning of water into wine - yes

You have hit the nail on the head. Religious indoctrination creates a situation where what is written in a religious tome is correct by default. That's why almost all believers have the same religion as their parents. Only believers do not appreciate this fact and they pretend that they would have come to their 'chosen' religion regardless of what environment they are born in, which is totally laughable. It's amazingly predictable stuff but religion can make people believe in the most outlandish things as you can see in the posts immediately above. We are in the 21st century and people still believe in talking snakes, virgin births and a paradise filled with virgins.

[Colon Man]

What do you mean by "he keeps failing to do"?

Well, the very first two people he created disobeyed him, so he expelled them from Eden. Then things got worse, so he eradicated all of the animal kingdom except for those who would fit on the Ark, then it all went wrong again and he had to put himself on Earth, born of a virgin, in order to redeem mankind and he failed once again because here we all are and the world is in a terrible state again.

[TH63]

I suspect God was missing from many of our festivities, in much the same way He went missing this time ten years ago.
I say this as a Catholic, finding it increasingly difficult to reconcile all the shit He allows to happen in the world.

[Taunton Blue Genie]

What do you mean by "he keeps failing to do"?

Well, the very first two people he created disobeyed him, so he expelled them from Eden. Then things got worse, so he eradicated all of the animal kingdom except for those who would fit on the Ark, then it all went wrong again and he had to put himself on Earth, born of a virgin, in order to redeem mankind and he failed once again because here we all are and the world is in a terrible state again.

He can't even get the majority of the population of the planet to believe in him after 2,000 years.

[Gofer Blue]

TBG you wrote: (I have copied the text as I cannot abide these massively long nested responses): I don't have to ask myself anything as it's all about your belief system. You totally believe in some things written in the Bible and and have doubts about others. If it's not all truth where do you draw the line? If you admit that some of the stories are 'poetic' (if you do not wish to use the word 'folklore') how do you know for sure what is fact and what is 'poetic'? What analysis do you adopt to separate one from another? My lay preacher friend has left many churches as he draws a different line in the sand regarding this matter to the incumbent preachers. What evidence is there that the universe was created in 6 days, for example? Isn't it true that believers differ as to what they believe is literal truth and what is allegory?

You may not recall from many of my previous posts on the various "God threads" but my starting point is always based on what Jesus said and did. Now that sounds like a cop-out I know, but to me Christianity is all about Christ, not what some ancient Jewish tribes got up to. Jesus himself said he brought a new covenant which means a new understanding of the relationship between God and mankind. If something was really important then I would expect Jesus to have had a say on it. Again, I know you will say that Jesus did not speak about quite a few things so it is dangerous to assume that because he didn't, then it wasn't relevant; I accept that. The gospel boils down to the two critical commandments that Jesus gave: firstly love the Lord your God with all your heart, soul and mind, and secondly do to others as you would have them do to you. No allegory there!

I think if your lay preacher friend and the other believers just concentrated on these and not get hung up on talking snakes and donkeys they would be able to live in peace with one another. Apart from debating points on this forum and various other atheist websites they form no part of the day-to-day life of a practising Christian.

[Gofer Blue]

What do you mean by "he keeps failing to do"?

Well, the very first two people he created disobeyed him, so he expelled them from Eden. Then things got worse, so he eradicated all of the animal kingdom except for those who would fit on the Ark, then it all went wrong again and he had to put himself on Earth, born of a virgin, in order to redeem mankind and he failed once again because here we all are and the world is in a terrible state again.

God didn't fail - we did!! We had a second chance when Jesus came to show the way and we promptly bumped him off. Like a lot of things in life, we get what we deserve.

[Taunton Blue Genie]

TBG you wrote: (I have copied the text as I cannot abide these massively long nested responses): I don't have to ask myself anything as it's all about your belief system. You totally believe in some things written in the Bible and and have doubts about others. If it's not all truth where do you draw the line? If you admit that some of the stories are 'poetic' (if you do not wish to use the word 'folklore') how do you know for sure what is fact and what is 'poetic'? What analysis do you adopt to separate one from another? My lay preacher friend has left many churches as he draws a different line in the sand regarding this matter to the incumbent preachers. What evidence is there that the universe was created in 6 days, for example? Isn't it true that believers differ as to what they believe is literal truth and what is allegory?

(As for your comment about my pay preacher friend his arguments are far more cogent than yours. And he is able to discuss the matter without fabricating my position, which is something that you have been unable to do. To be frank, having worked with him closely for 5 years I think that he is a lot brighter than you).