Is Jesus Really God From The Beginning

[Skarr]

The very thought that anyone in his right mind could even consider immaculate conception as a remote possibility is something that is not only baffling but also exhibits a level of stupidity that is simply astounding in this day and age.

 

Even the idea of God and attributing human qualities to a God is an exercise in stupidity. The Earth is more than 4.5 billion years old. Mankind came along only recently, a mere speck of dust in the cosmos and pretends to know something. Man will one day become extinct, consumed by his own stupidity, which is often a product of arrogance in himself (or herself) - I should say humankind instead of Man.

 

Sometimes, I think humans were born to destroy. There are so many good things humans do but overall, as a mass of beings, they are nothing but destructive, as most humans are inherently selfish. That's why you have so many countries, so many religions, so many races, cultures, etc. etc.

 

From space, all you see is one planet - Earth.

 

Anyway, our lives are all short and let each man or woman go in peace, as the mystery of life will never be solved ! If it does get solved, none of us will be here alive to witness it.

 

This may sound very cynical but I think truth is always hard, even cynical. Face it, there's nothing out there, there are no answers waiting to be found. Everytime someone makes another great discovery, there's a pandora's box also being opened. This is with respect to all the scientific advances, especially those connected with the theories on the origin of the universe. String theory is the newest here and doesn't explain anything except postulate multiple dimensions!

 

Religions which claim to have answers are the worst offenders as those who claim to know something in their hierarchy know nothing or next to nothing! All they can do is quote from books that anyone could have written or made up as it is nothing but a hodge podge of writings, much of it lost in translation.

 

True discovery lies within the human being's mind and what you call soul (which is basically a big black hole or the unknown - everything you don't know can be lumped together as the soul), will remain that - unknown, unseen, unheard and untouched.

 

We're all dreamers and perhaps as Julius Caesar once said (quoting Shakespeare), we should "Leave him, he's a dreamer"

 

If you want to know anything at all about the human mind, thought, God etc. see an old movie - "Solaris" where humans encounter a non typical alien. Here, the alien is not a creature on the surface of a planet but the planet itself, as it is sentient and is aware of its own mortality! Can you even begin to compare a human's mind with a planet's mind.

 

Consider this also - each human being is actually made up of billions of tiny creatures. To each of those creatures, our body must seem like a planet or solar system. When those creatures cross from our body to another (what we call disease), this could be their intergalactic journey.

 

At the sub atomic level, what is matter but empty space. Who has the answers to that one. Most solid objects only appear to be solid. At its heart, everything is empty space and even the atom looks like a microscopic model of our own planet.

 

Who is to say whether what we are seeing outside (planets, stars, the earth, whatever) is not an illusion and a reflection of what is going on within our own bodies and souls ? Do we all exist in a multi dimensional universe, each unique and therefore, each human being, when he dies, also kills the entire universe in that dimension in which he or she exists. By this theory, there could theoretically be billions of universes, which are born and which die.

 

Time is itself a relative concept and may not exist at all. After all, we perceive time only in relation to something else. However, absolute time .. does it really exist or not ? How can this be proved, if at all.

 

My 2 c... on this topic which has nothing to do with Rome or Roman history. [ Sorry for the rambling but this sort of religious BS always gets my ire as I see that there are so many ignorant and stupid people in the world]

[Ursus]

I would say Christianity is on topic for Roman history within a forum specifically dedicated to religious matters. It did influence Roman history and was in turn influenced by Roman history, no?

 

I also don't think calling religious people stupid and ignorant is the kind of commentary we want around here. Disagreements are fine. Denigrating attacks are not.

 

 

If this thread gets too ugly I'll have to shut it down.

Edited July 15, 2005 by Ursus

[Spurius]

To Skarr and Ursus:

 

You two are generally level headed and should have no real issues to clash over. This topic does not seem to be proceeding into any type of a discussion appropriate to this forum.

 

Maybe it should be moved to the Lounge, or maybe closed. In any event , it doesn't seem to be evoking any substantive Roman history responses.

 

Wargamer: Want to try again with a more direct, and somewhat more historically pointed, opening post? This could still become an interesting discussion on the evolution of Christianity with the spirtualism vs rationalism paradox that Romans wrestled with too.

[Ursus]

I wasn't exactly thrilled to see the topic because I knew what it might lead to, but I don't consider it off topic and am hoping it might be salvaged. If that proves too optimistic your suggestion will definitely come into play.

[roman wargamer]

Skarr =All they can do is quote from books that anyone could have written...much of it lost in translation.

------------------

but why qoute to get your point.

 

We're all dreamers and perhaps as Julius Caesar once said (quoting Shakespeare), we should "Leave him, he's a dreamer"

 

-------------------

as far as i know, i never made my own words, it is all qouted from the Holy Bible.

to give an impartial biblical work subject.

 

1. i am pointing only that the Jewish have a monotheism religion.

 

2. that the Church of Christ founded by Jesus of Nazareth, was also a monotheism.

 

3. until 100 BCE, it is a monotheism.

 

4. it is only in the 300 BCE, that a clash of doctrinal belief are coming,

that the concept of two gods slowly appears.The Father God, and the Son of God is also now god.

 

4. and the concept of "trinity god" also slowly emerged. it is the Roman who finally control the church.

 

5. and only in the 800 BCE that the Roman Catholic officially declared, from the very organizational

structure of the christian church.

____________________________________________________________________________________

to Ursus.

 

i can verily handle those highly opinionated comment. it only show that my work article can spark

imagination, but reading things you did not like should not make you careless to use harsh words.

____________________________________________________________________________________

To Spurius,

 

Maybe it should be moved ...or maybe closed.

------------------

reply= why recommend that on my article, i am very civil on all of my post.

it is not me who remarks the harsh words, why not recommend the harsh poter.

 

------------------

it doesn't seem to be evoking any substantive Roman history responses.

 

reply= how can you very sure... no reply does not mean... it evoke no mind stimulation.

it is posted last May 12,2005. we are now already July 15. means it is more than 45 days old.

it have 444 readings and 18 inter-post replies.

 

and suddenly you will recommend it to be closed.

________________________________________________________________________________

 

some members here that suddenly "come and go"... maybe are the same that send me scam letter,

that i sometimes i report to the FBI and the White Collar Crime section.

i normally received 1 scam email a week. and 1 virus a month.

 

i been in the internet more than 5 years ago, but i only begin to get it since the Ms. Niagne incident.

_________________________________________________________________________________

 

i am giving the "unrv. moderator" a free hand to edit my post.

to show that i have a good intent , to the best of my belief. i can hold hard commentaries and opinion.

 

rad adenir dulay

[Ursus]

to Ursus.

 

i can verily handle those highly opinionated comment. it only show that my work article can spark

imagination, but reading things you did not like should not make you careless to use harsh words.

 

Harsh? I was in no way being harsh. That was, by my standards, a friendly warning to stay on topic.

[Primus Pilus]

btw Wargamer, the scam emails you get have nothing to do with this website. They are very common and randomly sent scams.

 

They are called 419 scams 419 coalition

 

US Secret Service

 

FBI

[roman wargamer]

to Ursus.

 

i can verily handle those highly opinionated comment. it only show that my work article can spark

imagination, but reading things you did not like should not make you careless to use harsh words.

 

Harsh? I was in no way being harsh. That was, by my standards, a friendly warning to stay on topic.

To Ursus,

 

my apology, i did not mean that sentence for you, although it appears on the same paragrhap.

 

"but reading things you did not like should not make you careless to use harsh words."

 

i means it to be for the general reader, but specifically to Skarr.

_______________________________________________________________________________

when i read "The Prince" in 1983, i was only 17 years old.

 

in that book, he advise the Prince, after he get rein of the government.

" to elimanate or kill all of his political and military opponent or threat, all at once and the same time.

not by one by one for a continous time, but only once in a one time entrapment."

 

at our modern time , it is now "genocide", an international war crime.

 

in 1972 we have a martial law, it means i witness myself actual "war of attrition" of the rebel,

between the Muslim indigenous and the government forces, friends suddenly become enemy in a day.

where soldier died in a hundreds in a months, where rotten flesh can be smelled even in a distance.

 

so i have a very different "point of view" of the "war". it make us poor, no peace, no opportunity.

the threat of sudden and unprovoke murder is always there.

 

and i read Machiavelli advise a "stealth murder of a group of people". i do not conform.

 

But i understand his time and purpose. i still love the book. to me it is a "classical military treatise".

_______________________________

erratum: bce should be written AD

_______________________________

Primus Pilus say's

 

the scam emails you get have nothing to do with this website.

 

my reply is Yes. i even post a thread like that in the after lounge forum.

 

what i mean...why punish a regular member... if other irregular people, write a bad worded comment's

in our article with malicious intent, it is better if their post will be edited.

 

thanks for the replies,

[Spurius]

roman wargamer:

I was suggesting that this thread be closed to avoid a possible problem between posters. I should have followed my own post to trust the respondants and moderators.

 

I apologize, really. I would have kept this from growing.

 

Back on your topic:

Make sure that your knowledge about christ is right, lest you be among those who the Bible forewarn would be deceived and doom for believing in a "different Jesus" or "Jesus whom the apostles did not preach

.

 

Now do you mean the differences that exist between the gospels, Mark vs Luke vs Matthew, on events and sayings? On the inevitable mistakes made by people after the fact?

[Virgil61]

The very thought that anyone in his right mind could even consider immaculate conception as a remote possibility is something that is not only baffling but also exhibits a level of stupidity that is simply astounding in this day and age.

 

My 2 c... on this topic which has nothing to do with Rome or Roman history. [ Sorry for the rambling but this sort of religious BS always gets my ire as I see that there are so many ignorant and stupid people in the world]

 

In spite of my Catholic upbringing I'm not a believer anymore. Nevertheless I don't fall to calling others who believe in religion as exhibiting "levels of stupidity". My own mother is one of those "ignorant and stupid people", for her religion allows a measure of consolation for a difficult life. As for myself, I continue to allow Catholcism a large amount of respect as a legacy of my own ethnic background and the role it's played in my family's cultural past.

 

I think religion has evolutionary biological origins that impart psychological and cultural functions. And while it's responsible for a lot of "unpleasantness" in this world I acknowledge the fact it also help millions to cope with life in lieu of a secular philosphy. I also know many other people, friends and acquiantances, who exhibit "levels of stupidity" by maintaining religious beliefs. They also happen to be MDs, lawyers and Phds in areas as diverse as the humanities to scientific research. One of my closest friends has a Phd in mathematics with which she works conducting studies of cancer trial outcomes. She is an atheist, raised in Russia while it was a part of the Soviet Union, but baptised her children and raised them in the Orthodox church. Why? Because she believes it's a part of their Russian heritage.

 

As for "human beings were born to destroy", I'd take a look at studies of primate [and more recently dolphin] cultures if I were you. You'll find that the capacity for destruction and quest for dominance within a species isn't limited to human beings. It seems to be a common trait among the highest life forms on the planet.

 

Having said this I think this thread shouldn't be closed- but it should be moved to the lounge. It has nothing to do with Rome.

[Ursus]

Well, I suppose the question of whether of not JC is the son of the Hebrew deity, and King of the Jews, is ultimately what got him killed under Roman law. So it might have something to do with Roman history ... but I suppose moving it to the lounge is probably the best compromise under the circumstances.

 

Consider it done.

[Skarr]

I apologize if I offended anyone's sensibilities here ... some of my comments were probably out of line if taken out of context, as evident here, as these comments weren't directed at specific individuals.

 

Having said that, I'm not against any religion or sect per se. In fact, I'm in favor of anything you really believe in, provided it meets certain criteria which I hold dear to my own beliefs in various things - some of them based on observable scientific facts, the others based on my own experiences / observations.

 

In any case, I believe strongly in certain things and while I do not wish to convert everyone to all of my beliefs, I think I just threw a few points out there - points to ponder, debate and disagree upon, that's all.

[Marcus Justinus]

The problem lies more in the fact that the subject matter of which we speak is living history, as opposed to a reflection, study, and comment about past events.

 

Christianity is still around in full force, and therefore is not so easily discussed as say Zeus, Baal, Molech, etc. We can almost assuredly find few, if any, individuals who practice those religions. Because of this we can look back and debate with little obstruction.

 

I myself am a Christian, but having been immersed in professional studies and surrounded by individuals from all walks of life (Theologians, Historians, Scientists, etc.), I am accustomed to seeing the debate over Iesu Christi continue to the point of absurdity. I am also used to those who see the futility of my faith. It doesn't bother me to hear someone mention my convictions as lacking (or in many cases much more profane language).

 

The fact of the matter is that we can debate this for hours on end, neither side having gained ground because both exhibit faith in their views. For a Christian, the events surrounding Yeshua are of a supernatural divine nature, therefore the impossible is possible. To others it is a matter of opinion as varied as the denominations that claim to follow Him.

 

I have to drive an hour to a lecture so I will hopefully be back soon to post more. I've been terribly busy as of late, and for that my apologies.

 

Keep the discussion civil and remember that everyone's views are their own. Discuss, do not command

[roman wargamer]

Is Jesus Really God From The Beginning , article is really intented to be "part of" The History Of Christian Church ( Book )

 

 

The History Of Christian Church

+++++++++++++++++++++

 

The Beginning = Is Jesus Really God From The Beginning

 

The Church was Founded

 

The Apostle Time 100 AD

 

The Persecution 33 AD to 313 AD

 

The Union of The Church and The State = 313 AD The Edict Of Tolerance

 

The Council Of Nicea in 325 AD ( In the Time of Emperor Constantine, son of Constantius ) Jesus was made god.

 

The Trinity Doctrine of Gods was made.

 

The Romanized Church was officially name The Roman Catholic. 800 AD

 

======================================================================================

 

may i ask if this one is not history ? is this one not Roman History ? is just happen, it has the flavor of religion.

 

because it is religion, i begin from the Holy Bible, and from the "biblical point of view."

______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Spurius = Now do you mean the differences that exist between the gospels, Mark vs Luke vs Matthew, on events and sayings? On the inevitable mistakes made by people after the fact?

 

reply = i believe the Holy Bible do not have a single contradiction. why not give a specific qoute.

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________

1. i am pointing only that the Jewish have a monotheism religion.

 

2. that the Church of Christ founded by Jesus of Nazareth, was also a monotheism.

 

3. until 100 BCE, it is a monotheism.

 

4. it is only in the 300 BCE, that a clash of doctrinal belief are coming,

that the concept of two gods slowly appears.The Father God, and the Son of God is also now god.

 

4. and the concept of "trinity god" also slowly emerged. it is the Roman who finally control the church.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

thanks to Marcus Justinus

 

and to VALERIAN , i already read part of your web, i conform to most views.

[Princeps]

Hmmm, skimmed the thread, but not read it in great detail, mainly because I don't believe in the conventional explaination of god given to us through the bible.

 

I personally see religion as a form of control. In ancient times, when christianity was founded, control of the population was very difficult without some form of cohersion such as religion.

 

It also gives people something to hope for, to look forward to. George Orwell had a particularly good analogy in the book "Animal Farm", when he had one of his characters call heaven "sugar loaf mountain" (I think it was the crow).

 

(having said that, the god theory is no more incredulous or fantastical than the "big bang" theory. I suppose my beiefs lie somewhere in the middle of these two theories).