Persecution Of Jews By Christians?

[journeyman]

i was being cheeky, I actually do not self identify as Christian. is my status  relevant to your assertions?

Of course. I wouldn't expect anyone who isn't a follower of Christ to understand him.

[Oscar_Kipling]

I answered this post of yours yesterday, but somehow it got deleted.

Such a bummer when that happens.

let us not love with words or speech but with actions and in truth. 1Jn.3:18

then shall thy light rise in obscurity, and thy darkness be as the noonday: Isa.58:10

are you saying that a real Christian that is following Christ will alway lead people toward Christ because they simply exude the undeniable quintessence of Jesus's glory because a life lived for Christ and by his will is like that of a pure shining beacon of righteousness in a world of darkness?

It makes the scribes understanding suspect.

are you saying that leading one toward Christ is not a perfect process in that the "world" will have a perfect understanding of it , but the perfection is in Christ either through his person or through those that truly live by his will exemplifying righteousness even when it is not understood? the deal is to live right and you will be pointing in the right direction despite if people mistake where or to what you are pointing?

It's just apparent...Heb.1:1, Jer.25:4, etc.

are you saying that everything that is needed to come to the lord is distilled in his word, but the worldly forces and desires cause the sinner to misconstrue it as foolishness to be dismissed or ignored even though it is complete and sufficient spiritual nutrition?

It plainly says the Messiah gives sinners time to turn to God before judgment,

except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish. Lk.3:13

I gave her space to repent  Rev.2:21

The opportunity to repent was never at issue, it is the demand for it. It is undeniably demanded or the wages are paid...like you cannot be disagreeing with that...at best it feels like you want me to consider the opportunity given as a mitigating factor as in We are given an opportunity to seek forgiveness that we don't deserve as if that is analogous to not seeking justice or repentance at all... as in the case of turning the other cheek and that is full stop end of story when slapped.

"The next time" is the same as,

they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame. Heb.6:6

That is what I meant, you can sincerely promise and intend not to do it again, and then do it again and then repeat the same repentance process, for me that is another problematic aspect of God's sense of justice but I felt it was out of the scope of our discussion so a whole other bag of tomatoes.

You missed the part where he left an empty tomb.

If the descriptions in the Gospels are an accurate depiction of a sequence of events then it is neither true nor useful to assert that leaving the tomb was essentially Jesus jumping down off of the cross...That simply didn't happen, the bible doesn't assert that it happened and it is my understanding that the way that it did happen was exactly as God intended it to happen for a purpose so even intimating a different sequence is to corrupt the intended message...Jesus was taken off of the cross as a corpse , entombed and then rose from the dead and exited that tomb...he did not jump down off of the cross. is what the bible actually said happened important?

Your point doesn't include the Spirit groaning by reason of our weakness. You seem to think God is without feeling, instead of feeling more deeply.

Not without feeling, but different in some very significant ways. If I ever had a point it was that these arguments are always perilous because God isn't like us. Let's take your assertion and treat it as true that Gods feelings are like a human feelings multiplied by infinity, and taken to the depth of forever, and still that is only a shadow of a whisper of a glimpse of how deeply our lord feels. If that is the case you can always ask, why not less? would an undeserved pin prick or an unearned snide remark directed at Jesus have not been infinitely more painful to our perfect lord than all the torture and anguish of all past and future human existence? Probably, because it had nothing to do with how little or much the lord suffered and everything to do with what a human understands as suffering, that is to say it was performative, a show put on for our benefit no matter how you slice it. Indulging in the amount of agony isn't even the point imo.

You don't seem to understand that Jesus beat the devil up during his ministry.

I don't? His death and defeat of the devil and subsequent return to the world of the living wasn't a part of his ministry? if it wasn't then in your view what was the point of all this anguish and agony and defeating death stuff about if not closing statements of a long ministerial argument?

Not sure you understand how sports work, If you don't like playing basketball then getting traded to another basketball team will still have you playing basketball. I don't simply want to be traded to another basketball team, I see people playing a game that they keep calling basketball but there is no hoop and they are playing it with a shuttlecock and a racket on a baseball diamond and I'm in the bleachers reading a comic book because I don't want to play and I suck at sports anyway...or something.

[Oscar_Kipling]

i was being cheeky, I actually do not self identify as Christian. is my status  relevant to your assertions?

Of course. I wouldn't expect anyone who isn't a follower of Christ to understand him.

Weird, I wonder how one becomes a follower then. oh nevermind, not through understanding but by faith, but then you understand, but will never be able to explain it? like a club you have to join before you even know what the club is really you just have to find its members irresistibly attractive in a deeply spiritual and righteous way.....is that it?

[journeyman]

are you saying that a real Christian that is following Christ will alway lead people toward Christ because they simply exude the undeniable quintessence of Jesus's glory because a life lived for Christ and by his will is like that of a pure shining beacon of righteousness in a world of darkness?

Yes,

You are the light of the world. Mt.5:14

in the midst of a crooked and twisted generation Phl.2:15

Of course, children need to grow.

are you saying that leading one toward Christ is not a perfect process in that the "world" will have a perfect understanding of it , but the perfection is in Christ either through his person or through those that truly live by his will exemplifying righteousness even when it is not understood? the deal is to live right and you will be pointing in the right direction despite if people mistake where or to what you are pointing?

The world is still being told and some have believed it, some haven't. I don't know how someone I share the gospel with doesn't understand that I'm pointing at the God of the Jews.

are you saying that everything that is needed to come to the lord is distilled in his word, but the worldly forces and desires cause the sinner to misconstrue it as foolishness to be dismissed or ignored even though it is complete and sufficient spiritual nutrition?

We've covered how God transmits his word. Of course to follow the way of our Lord is foolish to people who want it their way.

The opportunity to repent was never at issue, it is the demand for it. It is undeniably demanded or the wages are paid...like you cannot be disagreeing with that...at best it feels like you want me to consider the opportunity given as a mitigating factor as in We are given an opportunity to seek forgiveness that we don't deserve as if that is analogous to not seeking justice or repentance at all... as in the case of turning the other cheek and that is full stop end of story when slapped.

I thought we were past the truth that God demands repentance.
I showed you where Messiah left no doubt about that. It's kind of like your best friend saying, Don't drive down that road...there's a cliff at the end. So you, the passenger tell your friend the driver to stop, but he doesn't want to. He's going anyway. So you get out and over he goes.

That is what I meant, you can sincerely promise and intend not to do it again, and then do it again and then repeat the same repentance process, for me that is another problematic aspect of God's sense of justice but I felt it was out of the scope of our discussion so a whole other bag of tomatoes.

It's problematic if you wrongly assume a new believer is ready for war,

Now when Pharaoh had let the people go, God did not lead them by the way of the land of the Philistines, even though it was near; for God said, “The people might change their minds when they see war, and return to Egypt.” Exo.13:17

If the descriptions in the Gospels are an accurate depiction of a sequence of events then it is neither true nor useful to assert that leaving the tomb was essentially Jesus jumping down off of the cross...That simply didn't happen, the bible doesn't assert that it happened and it is my understanding that the way that it did happen was exactly as God intended it to happen for a purpose so even intimating a different sequence is to corrupt the intended message...Jesus was taken off of the cross as a corpse , entombed and then rose from the dead and exited that tomb...he did not jump down off of the cross. is what the bible actually said happened important?

Lol of course it is, but coming down from the cross early would have been the end of the suffering sinners were inflicting on him and the next event would judgment day. Besides,

there shall no sign be given to it but the sign of Jonah the prophet Mt.12:39

Not without feeling, but different in some very significant ways. If I ever had a point it was that these arguments are always perilous because God isn't like us. Let's take your assertion and treat it as true that Gods feelings are like a human feelings multiplied by infinity, and taken to the depth of forever, and still that is only a shadow of a whisper of a glimpse of how deeply our lord feels. If that is the case you can always ask, why not less? would an undeserved pin prick or an unearned snide remark directed at Jesus have not been infinitely more painful to our perfect lord than all the torture and anguish of all past and future human existence? Probably, because it had nothing to do with how little or much the lord suffered and everything to do with what a human understands as suffering, that is to say it was performative, a show put on for our benefit no matter how you slice it. Indulging in the amount of agony isn't even the point imo.

Maybe it's because you're not being conformed to his image now.

I don't? His death and defeat of the devil and subsequent return to the world of the living wasn't a part of his ministry? if it wasn't then in your view what was the point of all this anguish and agony and defeating death stuff about if not closing statements of a long ministerial argument?

I'm talking about the sufferings of Christ which continue in believers. His resurrection goes without saying.

Weird, I wonder how one becomes a follower then. oh nevermind, not through understanding but by faith, but then you understand, but will never be able to explain it? like a club you have to join before you even know what the club is really you just have to find its members irresistibly attractive in a deeply spiritual and righteous way.....is that it?

People can understand some things about God, without understanding others. Christians grow in knowledge. Like the knowledge that our Savior wants us to join a club that will cost us our lives.

[Oscar_Kipling]

Yes,

You are the light of the world. Mt.5:14

in the midst of a crooked and twisted generation Phl.2:15

Of course, children need to grow.

Great!


[quote author=journeyman link=topic=326.msg6959#msg6959 date=1661655
The world is still being told and some have believed it, some haven't. I don't know how someone I share the gospel with doesn't understand that I'm pointing at the God of the Jews.
[/quote]

Maybe the God of the Jews is a very specific and well defined thing, but the descriptions and interpretations of the God of the Jews can vary by quite a margin.


[quote author=journeyman link=topic=326.msg6959#msg6959 date=1661655
We've covered how God transmits his word. Of course to follow the way of our Lord is foolish to people who want it their way.
[/quote]
I mean it's covered to your satisfaction I suppose, but I wouldn't say we've covered it. I'm not even talking about following, merely understanding. Is it possible to understand these things and not want to follow? There doesn't seem to be consensus on whether non-christians can/do understand but reject anyway or they reject because they don't understand or they don't understand because they want to reject (the trickiest one of all imo).


[quote author=journeyman link=topic=326.msg6959#msg6959 date=1661655
I thought we were past the truth that God demands repentance.
I showed you where Messiah left no doubt about that. It's kind of like your best friend saying, Don't drive down that road...there's a cliff at the end. So you, the passenger tell your friend the driver to stop, but he doesn't want to. He's going anyway. So you get out and over he goes. [/quote]

I guess then I don't understand what your initial point was, what is the significance of Jesus not reacting to the abuse while he was on the cross? What was the comparison of my reactions to transgressions to Jesus' reactions meant to illustrate?

[quote author=journeyman link=topic=326.msg6959#msg6959 date=1661655
It's problematic if you wrongly assume a new believer is ready for war,

Now when Pharaoh had let the people go, God did not lead them by the way of the land of the Philistines, even though it was near; for God said, “The people might change their minds when they see war, and return to Egypt.” Exo.13:17
[/quote]

I don't know what you mean, but i'm happy to drop this tangent.

[quote author=journeyman link=topic=326.msg6959#msg6959 date=1661655
Lol of course it is, but coming down from the cross early would have been the end of the suffering sinners were inflicting on him and the next event would judgment day. Besides,

there shall no sign be given to it but the sign of Jonah the prophet Mt.12:39
[/quote]

okay, that is settled.

I do not understand what this means or how it would make a difference, and I'm not confident you will bother trying to explain it.

I must have missed your point again.


[quote author=journeyman link=topic=326.msg6959#msg6959 date=1661655
People can understand some things about God, without understanding others. Christians grow in knowledge. Like the knowledge that our Savior wants us to join a club that will cost us our lives.

Again, right over my head, I'd ask you to try rephrasing or explaining this in a different way, but I suppose it could be that my non-christian-ness is blocking me from understanding your posts...How can you tell when you need to try explaining something in a different way or in more detail and when a person's lack of faith is blocking them from understanding a clear and rich explanation?

[journeyman]

Maybe the God of the Jews is a very specific and well defined thing, but the descriptions and interpretations of the God of the Jews can vary by quite a margin.

What we can and do know is unchanging. We learn as we walk along with him.

I mean it's covered to your satisfaction I suppose, but I wouldn't say we've covered it. I'm not even talking about following, merely understanding. Is it possible to understand these things and not want to follow?

Yes. Mk.10:21-22 is a good example.

There doesn't seem to be consensus on whether non-christians can/do understand but reject anyway or they reject because they don't understand or they don't understand because they want to reject (the trickiest one of all imo).

There's nothing complicated about being too busy to go to a wedding, or Jonah telling Assyrians judgment is coming.

I guess then I don't understand what your initial point was, what is the significance of Jesus not reacting to the abuse while he was on the cross? What was the comparison of my reactions to transgressions to Jesus' reactions meant to illustrate?

If I understand you correctly, you believe our Lords' sacrifice is meaningless, since the unrepentant will ultimately face annihilation, but because of his propitiation, I'm not facing damnation.

I do not understand what this means or how it would make a difference, and I'm not confident you will bother trying to explain it.

It simply means the Messiah showed mercy to people who hated him and some people don't want to be conformed to that image.

I must have missed your point again.

My point is, some people were conformed to Christs' image,

Of whom the world was not worthy Heb.11:15

Again, right over my head, I'd ask you to try rephrasing or explaining this in a different way, but I suppose it could be that my non-christian-ness is blocking me from understanding your posts...How can you tell when you need to try explaining something in a different way or in more detail and when a person's lack of faith is blocking them from understanding a clear and rich explanation?

I simply meant God only wants what is best for us, which is to put him first. Simple as it gets.

[Oscar_Kipling]

What we can and do know is unchanging. We learn as we walk along with him.

fundamental disagreements within christianity would appear to be at widdershins with this, but I suppose if any and all consequential disagreement is chalked up to "Real Christians" vs "Not real Christians" then you can believe this.

Yes. Mk.10:21-22 is a good example.

I guess then people are just giving the benefit of the doubt when they suggest that someone doesn't /wouldnt/ couldnt understand as opposed to understanding perfectly but not wanting to follow. Or understand what is being said, and would accept it except it doesn't actually appear to be true by their honest reckoning.

.There's nothing complicated about being too busy to go to a wedding, or Jonah telling Assyrians judgment is coming.

no, i suppose there isn't, not sure why that is relevant tho.

If I understand you correctly, you believe our Lords' sacrifice is meaningless, since the unrepentant will ultimately face annihilation, but because of his propitiation, I'm not facing damnation.

Not meaningless, theatrics. The idea that there was some threshold of suffering that needed to be reached is incoherent whether you assert that God felt it more deeply or less deeply than a human would, God isn't a human and never actually could be, God didn't die as even you intimated if God had actually died then stuff would have stopped existing or something...there was no point where that was a possible thing. The best I can give it is that God performed a dramatic enactment of death to make a point that he really cares about humans, but the idea that there was some amount of suffering that was enough to satisfy anything other than his own sense of what was enough is inchoate at least as I see it. IOW dying in an apparently horrific way was meant to be shocking and amazing to human sensibilities and it doesn't really matter how much or little it actually hurt if at all because that wasn't the point like...Like a parent telling a dying kid if I could take your place I would, but they can't actually do that so they make sure to put on a big show to prove how much they love them in a way the child could understand... All of this suffering stuff to me is like arguing that it mattered what time of day the vanilla bean was picked that was used in the extract in the ice cream cake that the parent bought to celebrate the kid's last birthday...it's just not even the point, the parent got the kid's favorite cake. God gave humanity the thing that resonated with the sensibilities of many people then and many people now, That is the image of suffering the worst things people's imagination could muster, all while never having done anything to deserving such suffering and humiliation...its a powerful image, but the point is the image, its rhetoric, its an argument, its an analogy. That's the most generous I can be to the whole concept.

I do not understand how this addresses my questions, I still don't understand what your initial point was, what is the significance of Jesus not reacting to the abuse while he was on the cross? What was the comparison of my reactions to transgressions to Jesus' reactions meant to illustrate?

It simply means the Messiah showed mercy to people who hated him and some people don't want to be conformed to that image.

You don't know what happened/ will happen to those people, If I slap you 10 years after you slap me is it an act of mercy that I gave you 10 slap free years in the interim but still collected my due? If that's all you mean then fine, I cannot extract any great admiration from it but that's just me.

My point is, some people were conformed to Christs' image,

Of whom the world was not worthy Heb.11:15

Again, I guess if you believe that since we didn't deserve anything then any gesture is worthy of celebration then thats your deal. I feel like if I help someone, for instance I feed a hungry person I don't expect them to fall all over themselves with praise and devotion because they didn't earn or deserve a sandwich, you help people to help them. I think it would be especially weird to make my help contingent on them following my will.

I simply meant God only wants what is best for us, which is to put him first. Simple as it gets.

Yeah, that seems simple.

[journeyman]

fundamental disagreements within christianity would appear to be at widdershins with this, but I suppose if any and all consequential disagreement is chalked up to "Real Christians" vs "Not real Christians" then you can believe this.

The Bible plaunly says of God,

there is no variation or the slightest hint of change. Jas.1:17

People may change. So did angels (not for the better), but the Eternal doesn't change. It's possible not to know this characteristic of God and still be saved, but given time Christians come to know it.

no, i suppose there isn't, not sure why that is relevant tho.

It pertains because when Jonah went to Nineveh, those who were going to perish repented and,

a greater than Jonah is here. Mt.12:41

Not meaningless, theatrics.

His blood being spilled is theatrics? Maybe the reason you feel this way is because our Lords' sacrifice isn't personal to you.
Maybe it would help if you thought of Jesus as someone closely related to you, a mother, brother, child.
And your child went to help people, but was falsely accused of a crime and flayed. The theater wouldn't enter your mind.

The idea that there was some threshold of suffering that needed to be reached is incoherent whether you assert that God felt it more deeply or less deeply than a human would, God isn't a human and never actually could be

This is what most Jewish people and Jehovah Witnesses believe. I disagree.

God didn't die as even you intimated if God had actually died then stuff would have stopped existing or something...there was no point where that was a possible thing.

The Messiah wasn't only composed of flesh, so you're wrong.

The best I can give it is that God performed a dramatic enactment of death to make a point that he really cares about humans, but the idea that there was some amount of suffering that was enough to satisfy anything other than his own sense of what was enough is inchoate at least as I see it.

There's two reasons why Gos was satisfied. Besides the Son showing perfect love and some people responding, he proved the indifference and contempt of others.

IOW dying in an apparently horrific way was meant to be shocking and amazing to human sensibilities and it doesn't really matter how much or little it actually hurt if at all because that wasn't the point like...

It's apparent that most people weren't shocked at all, as most regarded Jesus as just another man. So your point is senseless, because in the ancient Roman empire, horrific suffering was commonplace. But believers who suffer horribly for their faith in God are being conformed into the Messiahs' image, which is why it says,

Precious in the sight of the LORD
Is the death of His saints. Psa116.15

Like a parent telling a dying kid if I could take your place I would, but they can't actually do that so they make sure to put on a big show to prove how much they love them in a way the child could understand...

Oh no my friend, you have the gospel backwards. God didn't become like us only to show how he can feel our pain, but so we would know his pain also,

 You will indeed drink My cup,  Mt.20:23

All of this suffering stuff to me is like arguing that it mattered what time of day the vanilla bean was picked that was used in the extract in the ice cream cake that the parent bought to celebrate the kid's last birthday...it's just not even the point, the parent got the kid's favorite cake. God gave humanity the thing that resonated with the sensibilities of many people then and many people now, That is the image of suffering the worst things people's imagination could muster, all while never having done anything to deserving such suffering and humiliation...its a powerful image, but the point is the image, its rhetoric, its an argument, its an analogy. That's the most generous I can be to the whole concept.

I think the point is, God created and lent to mankind and many said, "Is that all?"

I do not understand how this addresses my questions, I still don't understand what your initial point was, what is the significance of Jesus not reacting to the abuse while he was on the cross?

Well, withholding judgment is a reaction.

What was the comparison of my reactions to transgressions to Jesus' reactions meant to illustrate?

Sometimes the apathy of people.

It simply means the Messiah showed mercy to people who hated him and some people don't want to be conformed to that image.

You don't know what happened/ will happen to those people, If I slap you 10 years after you slap me is it an act of mercy that I gave you 10 slap free years in the interim but still collected my due? [/quote]Please excuse me, but the mercy would be when I came to you and appologized for sinning against you.....and you forgave me. It's not rocket science.

If that's all you mean then fine, I cannot extract any great admiration from it but that's just me.

Ok.

Again, I guess if you believe that since we didn't deserve anything then any gesture is worthy of celebration then thats your deal. I feel like if I help someone, for instance I feed a hungry person I don't expect them to fall all over themselves with praise and devotion because they didn't earn or deserve a sandwich, you help people to help them. I think it would be especially weird to make my help contingent on them following my will.

Understandable. What isn't understandable ist hat after you gave someone the sandwich, someone else came over and knocked your teeth doen your throat...or your moms throat.

Yeah, that seems simple.

Hey, it's much less complicated than water polo with a hockey stick in one hand and a comic book in the other. 😷

[Athanasius]

And the church teaches,

Anyone who hates a brother or sister is a murderer, and you know that no murderer has eternal life residing in him. 1Jn.3:15

It's between God and the individual,

For if our heart condemn us, God is greater than our heart, and knoweth all things. 1Jn.3:20

Mhmm...

And I'm saying if your experience is that people in the church sinned against another member, it's no different from Uriah bearing Davids' sin, or Joseph bearing his brothers sins, or the prophets being murdered, except that no excuse can be accepted for sinning against the truly innocent. You understand how Jesus bore the sins of men, yes?

Do you understand how patronising this is?

[Oscar_Kipling]

The Bible plaunly says of God,

there is no variation or the slightest hint of change. Jas.1:17

People may change. So did angels (not for the better), but the Eternal doesn't change. It's possible not to know this characteristic of God and still be saved, but given time Christians come to know it.

Well....okay

It pertains because when Jonah went to Nineveh, those who were going to perish repented and,

a greater than Jonah is here. Mt.12:41

Well....okay

His blood being spilled is theatrics? Maybe the reason you feel this way is because our Lords' sacrifice isn't personal to you.
Maybe it would help if you thought of Jesus as someone closely related to you, a mother, brother, child.
And your child went to help people, but was falsely accused of a crime and flayed. The theater wouldn't enter your mind.

In a way you are correct. If my Mother jumped in front of a speeding train to push me off of the tracks then I would rightly say she risked her life to save mine because in all likelihood a speeding train would kill my mother if it hit her, it would kill any human I'm aware of. The difference is that a speeding train cannot kill God no matter how fast it is moving, If my mother was God and jumped in front of that train to push me out of the way she is in no actual danger from that train. If My God/mother then started talking about how she risked her life to jump in front of that train then there would be nothing wrong with pointing out that she was never in any actual danger from that train.... God isn't like my actual mother because my actual mother isn't the all powerful creator of the universe, my mother can't bring her body back to life...pretending that Jesus and my mom are the same is an exercise in delusion. God didn't die on the cross God was fine and still sustaining the universe and executing plans and doing all the stuff the God can do while the meat suit was temporarily entombed....unless you are saying that when Jesus died that God ceased to exist for 3 days?

This is what most Jewish people and Jehovah Witnesses believe. I disagree.

I understand that you disagree, you are of course free to do so, just as I am free to point out that your idea incoherent.

The Messiah wasn't only composed of flesh, so you're wrong.

I'm wrong? Even though I've been doing nothing but making the point that Jesus/God wasn't and couldn't be a human subject to death because he's an eternal all powerful being....Humans do not have a component or other form or a different personage that is also the eternal all powerful creator of the universe....I've been very consistent in my insistence that The Messiah wasn't just composed of flesh and even if I conceded that run of the mill humans are also composed of an immortal soul, those immortal souls are not also all powerful.

There's two reasons why God was satisfied. Besides the Son showing perfect love and some people responding, he proved the indifference and contempt of others.

Did human contempt and indifference need Jesus to prove? I'd argue it didn't. Did God fail to show perfect love previously? If so, was it a lack of capacity or lack of desire? Anyway your illustration of what was enough and why is not incompatible with my statement.

It's apparent that most people weren't shocked at all, as most regarded Jesus as just another man. So your point is senseless, because in the ancient Roman empire, horrific suffering was commonplace. But believers who suffer horribly for their faith in God are being conformed into the Messiahs' image, which is why it says,

Precious in the sight of the LORD
Is the death of His saints. Psa116.15

So after spending all of this time trying to argue that the crucifixion was some inconceivably great and painful sacrifice that I should personally identify with as if it were my own mother or child, now you are going to pretend that it isn't one of the main points that like every Christian ever has used to sell Christianity ...Like it is THE go to example for how much God loves us , that he so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son!?! Like there are dead Jesus' on crosses imagery all over churches, in the figgin windows, statues & carvings.... it is a brand image that is more widespread and well known than mickey mouse ears, the nike swoosh, the american flag and the Coca-Cola font combined.....Moreover crucifixion even in Roman times was definitely something no one wanted to happen to them because they fully recognized that it was a terrible way to go, especially if you were innocent. Let's also not pretend that people thought that crucifiction wasn't a spectacle I mean it is designed as spectacle , they could have crucified people in some private dungeon somewhere but they did it in public for a reason, it was long and painful and humiliating AND public. Are you really going to disagree with that?

Oh no my friend, you have the gospel backwards. God didn't become like us only to show how he can feel our pain, but so we would know his pain also,

 You will indeed drink My cup,  Mt.20:23

This is not really different than what i've been saying, it was a SHOW , a display, an analogy, a dramatization communicated in a language that we could understand, it was meant to get some ideas across. The real difference is that God cannot feel our pain, not like we do, the stakes for God are different because God is not a human. If there can be any point it isn't that the pain that sin causes to God is actually crucifixion, it's an analogy or a metaphor, as if to say that being crucified while not deserving it is the closest thing that the human imagination can get to how sin feels to God. Either way you are talking about a depiction.

I think the point is, God created and lent to mankind and many said, "Is that all?"

Is that what many are saying? I'm not sure if I've crossed paths with anyone that has said they aren't Christians because Jesus didn't suffer enough, heck, i'm not even saying that, I'm saying the degree of suffering isn't the point , just a useful way to express an idea...unless i'm just misunderstanding this post. Please try to explain it to me in a different way if I have misunderstood this post.

Well, withholding judgment is a reaction.

Fine, but it's not the only reaction. The way you framed it was as if that was all to the story because you wanted to make a comparison , but I wanted to make sure that I pointed out that the comparison was not apt due to the fact that there was or will be more reaction , judgement will come.

Sometimes the apathy of people.

pretty long, confusing and convoluted walk to get to a thing that I already agree with...yep sometimes people are apathetic.

Please excuse me, but the mercy would be when I came to you and appologized for sinning against you.....and you forgave me. It's not rocket science.
 

You don't know that he forgave any of those people. Also you can forgive someone for something without them seeking it, God doesn't do that though. But alright I don't have a problem with calling that mercy, just a problem with you holding those people up as examples when you don't actually know that they were or will be forgiven. You're right, It's not rocket science, there aren't 1000 mutually exclusive  interpretations of the rocket equation and the results of the rocket equation are always consistent for everyone and you do not have to even believe that the rocket equation is your lord and savior or have faith in delta V for it to get you those consistent results.

Understandable. What isn't understandable ist hat after you gave someone the sandwich, someone else came over and knocked your teeth doen your throat...or your moms throat.

I consider this a slight tangent off of my main point, but unfortunately I'm quite familiar with people falling victim to undeserved random acts of violence, even people that were doing good in their communities. Still lets say I did get my teeth kicked in by the same hungry person I just fed, I don't think that my undeserved brutalization would grant me any special ability to then forgive some random 3rd party for some random act of violence that they commited. I don't think that undeserved suffering can be transferred or cashed in to forgive some third party....I don't think that forgiveness is something that requires undue suffering of innocents, I do not think it's something that must be earned, I can forgive someone because I recognize that nobody is perfect, I can forgive because I don't want to carry bitterness or anger or fear or vengeance around with me anymore, True I can forgive because someone apologised, but I can also just forgive someone because I want to. The idea that God can forgive only because he suffered the worst suffering on the cross and died just doesn't add up to me...so for me the best I can do is speculate on a meta-narrative that the antecedent of the gospels was a story meant to illustrate that you can forgive even the most brutal offenses even when you didn't deserve it and even when the offenders don't deserve it...I think the Jesus story fails in that it puts a bunch of supernatural structure around forgiveness that muddies the idea of gratuitous forgiveness. I think all of the metaphysical horsetrading and torment calculus make more sense as revisions, reconciliations or rationalizations that developed because people find it so difficult to forgive without some sense of ultimate justice or payment so some sort of payment was the only way to sell the idea or make sense of gratuitous forgiveness to many people.

Hey, it's much less complicated than water polo with a hockey stick in one hand and a comic book in the other. 😷

woah, I see you're familiar with the rules of Oscarball lol

[RabbiKnife]

Ah, the obscure reference to Calvinball earns you megapoints... 

The king of all sports, nu?

As to   "Can God die?"

Of course, orthodox Christianity holds to the hypostatic union, a concept that is mystery and that although it can be explained in human language, it cannot be fully understood, being partially logical and partially metaphysical.

Jesus, in orthodoxy, is 100% deity and 100% human.  In separable.  Can't explain it, won't try to, because it cannot be done.  It is not half and half, or some other ratio, or sometimes God and sometimes human.  The theoanthropos -- the God/man.  In our minds, 100% + 100% = 200%, but not in this equation.

So, clearly -- taken an orthodox Christian position -- we can clearly see the 100% human "part" die at the crucifixion.  The question is "what happened to the 100% God "part" of Jesus at that moment?

Well, we know from Scripture that "Jesus became sin for us, who knew no sin." 

We know that God the Father forsook Jesus, whatever that means, and however one member of the Godhead can forsake another part.

We know that the ultimate sacrifice was paid for the price of rebellion against God, and that Jesus vicariously and voluntarily took on that task for my benefit -- so that I wouldn't have to suffer a penalty that I could not pay in all of eternity.

In some mysterious, metaphysical way, God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit determined a method of sacrifice in which one of them would die for humans, and the other two would resurrect the third one from the dead.

I have no idea how that worked.  The logical part of me can see the nuance and the brilliance of the plan, but how that worked I have no idea.  How long was Jesus dead?  Three days?  A nanosecond?  Somewhere in between?  No idea.

I have to take the metaphysical by faith.   James 1:17 is speaking of a change of character, that is, God is not arbitrary or capricious like the Greek and Roman "gods" were in the eyes of the people.

The incarnation is a mystery, and we as humans either believe it by faith or not.

[journeyman]

Mhmm...

Well, it seems John was intimating that if our hearts condemn us, so will God. Do you agree?

Do you understand how patronising this is?

At one time I fhought it was, because I thought the guy who asked me the same question was a nut. I spent 2 decades in a Protestant church and Mr. Nutball was talking down to me? But he wasn't talking down to me, the way I'm not being condescending toward anyone, because we're all human. We're the same. I'm no bdtter than you, or you me. The point is, he explained the gospel in a way I'd never seen and I'm only sharing what made more sensr to me.

The point is, we (you and I) know that punishing an innocent man in place of a guilty man is wrong.  So what would happen to our current understanding of the gospel, if we applied what we know is wrong to it?

[Oscar_Kipling]

Ah, the obscure reference to Calvinball earns you megapoints... 

The king of all sports, nu?

As to   "Can God die?"

Of course, orthodox Christianity holds to the hypostatic union, a concept that is mystery and that although it can be explained in human language, it cannot be fully understood, being partially logical and partially metaphysical.

Jesus, in orthodoxy, is 100% deity and 100% human.  In separable.  Can't explain it, won't try to, because it cannot be done.  It is not half and half, or some other ratio, or sometimes God and sometimes human.  The theoanthropos -- the God/man.  In our minds, 100% + 100% = 200%, but not in this equation.

So, clearly -- taken an orthodox Christian position -- we can clearly see the 100% human "part" die at the crucifixion.  The question is "what happened to the 100% God "part" of Jesus at that moment?

Well, we know from Scripture that "Jesus became sin for us, who knew no sin." 

We know that God the Father forsook Jesus, whatever that means, and however one member of the Godhead can forsake another part.

We know that the ultimate sacrifice was paid for the price of rebellion against God, and that Jesus vicariously and voluntarily took on that task for my benefit -- so that I wouldn't have to suffer a penalty that I could not pay in all of eternity.

In some mysterious, metaphysical way, God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Spirit determined a method of sacrifice in which one of them would die for humans, and the other two would resurrect the third one from the dead.

I have no idea how that worked.  The logical part of me can see the nuance and the brilliance of the plan, but how that worked I have no idea.  How long was Jesus dead?  Three days?  A nanosecond?  Somewhere in between?  No idea.

I have to take the metaphysical by faith.   James 1:17 is speaking of a change of character, that is, God is not arbitrary or capricious like the Greek and Roman "gods" were in the eyes of the people.

The incarnation is a mystery, and we as humans either believe it by faith or not.

Ah a fellow sporting man lol

Unfortunately I cannot see the nuance or brilliance of the plan, vicarious atonement seems to be at odds with the edict that we should forgive...so much so that I tend to find it plausible that there may have been a historical Jesus figure that preached forgiveness and the concept that it can and should be given freely without conditions, but this didn't sell well after his death (or probably during his life, I mean he only had like 12 schmucks that were into his schtick)...so vicarious atonement is not just a rationalization of the meaningless death of a pretty chill dude, but a rationalization of forgiveness and justice itself because the idea of simply forgiving people without them ever having to pay for it is just a bridge too far. IOW from my perspective the logic of forgiveness within Christianity is fundamentally broken due to the kludge used to reconcile gratuitous forgiveness and the intrinsic human appetite for justice or fairness. The metaphysical handwaving of vicarious atonement (sorry that's how it looks to me) and all of the consequent epicycles and patches thereof allows Christians to claim that forgiveness and the salvific gift is both free and unfathomably costly. Don't get me wrong that's not the only reconciliatory kludge in the abrahamic religions or anything, I just happen to be talking about this particular aspect right now. I enjoy thinking about the metaphysics and the logic and poking at the reasoning and the logical consequences of this or that conception of the supernatural assertions people promote, but I do think that there are ideas underneath it all that could be useful if there wasn't an overarching need to make it all hang together...I sometimes think that this is sort of what some people mean by having faith, but it seems an unnecessarily unparsimonious step in order to get something out of it imo.

[RabbiKnife]

Careful, or you will be required to sing the Very Sorry Songg, unless you are posting in a No Song Zong or touching the Opposite Pole, in which I will have to sing.

Granted that the 12 disciples were indeed schmucks, there were also an addition 58, plus an addition 50 plus in the Upper Room, plus, well, as the Thessalonian citizens complained, they "turned the world upside down."

I guess for me, the ultimate issue is the sin issue.  I've studied a gazillioni (that's a brazillian, will 3 extra zeroes) world religions (granted, which a pre-existing Christian bias), and I can't find any that deal adequately with the eternal evilality/evilness of sin.

If there is a God, and I'm fine on that issue, and if there is evil, and I'm quite sure about that, then there has to be a way to resolve the seemingly incomprehensible discrepancy with their co-existence, and the Christian ethic of vicarious atonement is the only one that gets there for me.  Everything else ends with evil still either having power or co-existing with good.

But that's me.

I think that's 6 3/4 points, subject to revisions as the rules change, since we can only use the rules twice except for the rules that we can use more than twice.

[journeyman]

Yes,

You are the light of the world. Mt.5:14

in the midst of a crooked and twisted generation Phl.2:15

Of course, children need to grow.

Great!


[quote author=journeyman link=topic=326.msg6959#msg6959 date=1661655
The world is still being told and some have believed it, some haven't. I don't know how someone I share the gospel with doesn't understand that I'm pointing at the God of the Jews.

Maybe the God of the Jews is a very specific and well defined thing, but the descriptions and interpretations of the God of the Jews can vary by quite a margin.


[quote author=journeyman link=topic=326.msg6959#msg6959 date=1661655
We've covered how God transmits his word. Of course to follow the way of our Lord is foolish to people who want it their way.
[/quote]
I mean it's covered to your satisfaction I suppose, but I wouldn't say we've covered it. I'm not even talking about following, merely understanding. Is it possible to understand these things and not want to follow? There doesn't seem to be consensus on whether non-christians can/do understand but reject anyway or they reject because they don't understand or they don't understand because they want to reject (the trickiest one of all imo).


[quote author=journeyman link=topic=326.msg6959#msg6959 date=1661655
I thought we were past the truth that God demands repentance.
I showed you where Messiah left no doubt about that. It's kind of like your best friend saying, Don't drive down that road...there's a cliff at the end. So you, the passenger tell your friend the driver to stop, but he doesn't want to. He's going anyway. So you get out and over he goes. [/quote]

I guess then I don't understand what your initial point was, what is the significance of Jesus not reacting to the abuse while he was on the cross? What was the comparison of my reactions to transgressions to Jesus' reactions meant to illustrate?

[quote author=journeyman link=topic=326.msg6959#msg6959 date=1661655
It's problematic if you wrongly assume a new believer is ready for war,

Now when Pharaoh had let the people go, God did not lead them by the way of the land of the Philistines, even though it was near; for God said, “The people might change their minds when they see war, and return to Egypt.” Exo.13:17
[/quote]

I don't know what you mean, but i'm happy to drop this tangent.

[quote author=journeyman link=topic=326.msg6959#msg6959 date=1661655
Lol of course it is, but coming down from the cross early would have been the end of the suffering sinners were inflicting on him and the next event would judgment day. Besides,

there shall no sign be given to it but the sign of Jonah the prophet Mt.12:39
[/quote]

okay, that is settled.

I do not understand what this means or how it would make a difference, and I'm not confident you will bother trying to explain it.

I must have missed your point again.


[quote author=journeyman link=topic=326.msg6959#msg6959 date=1661655
People can understand some things about God, without understanding others. Christians grow in knowledge. Like the knowledge that our Savior wants us to join a club that will cost us our lives.

Again, right over my head, I'd ask you to try rephrasing or explaining this in a different way, but I suppose it could be that my non-christian-ness is blocking me from understanding your posts...How can you tell when you need to try explaining something in a different way or in more detail and when a person's lack of faith is blocking them from understanding a clear and rich explanation?

It seems what you're saying is, if someone lives after being killed, his sacrifice is meaningless. If I understand you correctly, consider hiw the Messiah said,

nothing shall by any means hurt you. Lk.10:19

whosoever liveth and believeth in me shall never die. Jn.11:26

But this doesn't make his followers sacrifices meaningless, or Jesus' for sure.