Resurrection Faith

If there is no resurrection- there is no purpose or meaning in the cross. The cross and the resurrection stand together and are at the center of the message of redemption which is the gospel.

Christianity is as segregationist as any other discriminatory Faith. The pleasantries only apply to Christians. This is the reason for the growing hate of secular government, non-believers, or people who dare to question religion. This discrimination is just as ugly a trait as those found in Extremist Islam or any other Fundamentalist religious sect. When people bring up the ugly verses of the Bible many Christians say that Jesus negated those verses. Well, He never said that the covenants or orders from God in the Old Testament were negated. This is one reason why religion can become de-reformed or unreformed. We in the modern civilization are lucky that Christians have misinterpreted or ignore sections of the Bible in most denominations or sects of Christianity. Matthew 5:17, John 5:45-47, Luke 24:44, John 6:19-23, and Hebrews 11:23-29 are all direct references to Moses and the Law of the Old Testament, yet they ignore many covenants of the Old Test. Many Christians Feel that Jesus would absolve them or not enforce Old Test. Law like the unethical verses held within Deuteronomy, Leviticus, or any other Book that outline the punishments to be carried out for breaking God’s Laws. A few examples are Deuteronomy verses 30:17-18/13:6-18/17:2-6 & 22:13-24, Leviticus verses 27:29/24:10-15 & 6:25, or Matthew 5:25. Non-believers are lucky that Christians have not been interpreting the Bible the way it could be interpreted. Jesus could have been claiming that one who felt that he or she had no sin could throw that first stone and there are those in our society who feel that they are absolved of sin due to their belief in Jesus. They believe that His death cleansed them of original sin; thus they feel that, if they live without sin they are now righteous through their belief in Jesus. As well, if they repent or confess their sin they are now without sin. It is these self-righteous people that scare me, because they would throw that first stone. As well, if you feel that belief in Jesus as a Son of God is absolute, than the laws of Moses, as punishment for sin no longer applies to those free of sin due to Jesus. This is the root of separatism and the elevation of themselves away from the rest of society. This exclusionary attitude is what drives the culture war. They feel that they are right while others are wrong because a book said so. They have the right to believe that but I have the right to say that is not based on logic, reason, or fact, rather it is based only on faith. The trick is in the details of the absolutist aspect of, believe or else. You were excused from the treatment under Deuteronomy, Leviticus, and other Biblical Books only if you were a believer in Jesus as God. But if you do not the punishments described applied directly to you, thus Mat. 5:17 is not a pass from Moses Law rather it is the pathway to avoid being stoned to death only if you follow Jesus as God. Now I do not claim any religion or faith. I do worry about any push towards using Biblical Law within Government. Because one can interpret the Bible to suit any means to any end that one can dream up. Most people think that Jesus was all about peace and love. This belief is only true if you believe that He was a God or a Son of God. Jesus would only bring peace and love for those who agree with Him as He states in Matthew 10:34-39 or John 8:24. All other non-believers fall under the code of Moses and the treatment of non-believers mentioned through out the Bible. Modern absolutist or literalist fundamentalism has interpreted the Bible to include the non-belief in Jesus as a sin or blasphemy. There are many who claim that Christianity is some how more advanced, superior, moral, or gentle version of religion than Islamic Fundamentalists. I would argue that Evangelical Fundamentalist Extremists are just as dangerous or potentially threatening to a free society as Islamic Fundamentalist Extremists. I would also argue that all the main three religions are all capable of 7th or 15th century treatment of those whom they view as different or non-believers. Any good that has come from religion is negated by all the religious war, hate, terrorism, discrimination, or violence that permeate the history of human existence. We are lucky to live in a secular nation, where the government is not governed by religion nor is religion governed by the state. Our only protection from reverting to witch hunts, crusades, forced conversions, and other religious injustice is our secular government. The potential for abuse of mankind is written within the pages of the Bible because it treats those who do not believe as subhuman soulless 2nd class citizens and there is nothing that can eliminate that effect within the society of Biblical Theology.

SUO SIBI GLADIO HUNC JUGULO

Victoria- want to tell everyone again what a peace-lover al-Qaradawi is? Or that the meaning of Islam is peace and not surrender? I could go on..

Get some help.

Mr. Qaradawi (spiritual leader of the Muslim Brotherhood) has issued a Fatwa called ”El-amalijat al-istishadiya a’zam suwar al-jihad” (Suicide operations are the highest form for Jihad). The Fatwa claims that suicide operations are: a) a defense of Islamic territory and religion; b) Jihad in honor of Allah; c) not terrorism but heroic acts; and d) not by any means suicide, but as far removed from suicide as conceivable. The Fatwa was issued 3 October 2001 and can be found in Arabic on Mr. Qaradawi’s home pages.

www.qaradawi.net

actually amro-
farnaz said that march 25th @ 5:07am

you read my response @ march 25th @ 10:28am

over 5 hours later-

i dont rephrase what people say, but copy it exactly for the sake of accuracy.

i asked him to post where he got this-

as with the allegation (false) that i asserted i was a christian somewhere-

as with the allegation that other posters have called me a hater (not til now)

as with any support for the many accusations of lying-

so far-
silence-

so, the allegations can be dismissed-

hope you are clear on this now.

thats why it helps to read ALL the words-
not just the ones that confirm an already established mindset.

Victoria wrote to Farnaz:

"Among posts to another panel, someone pointed out that you are a Jew.S/he went on to say that when you rise up in defense of others in lieu of asserting and defending your own group/religious identity, you are quite understandably held in contempt by those you seek to "protect."

let me point out, it is quite possible , and ive done it with people of different races, sexual orientation, religion-...

Get therapy, Victoria. Farnaz is not your brother, Idiot, and neither am I,

looks like we have a new group here-

so, the consensus is that 20% of the world's population, who believe the very benign and truthful 5 pillars of faith of islam are lairs?

thats quite a claim!

but this is america kids-
we have freedom of expression, and more importantly- freedom to express our religious beliefs.

so here's how it works-

find posts by myself, where there is a demonstrable lie or inconsistency-
genrerally here- we respect when sources are supplied-

so post the question the alleged lie takes place-
and of course the time and date-

so that it can be located of course-

so, this is a direct challenge to the accusers here-

another little foible in america-
innocent until guilty- facing ones accusers (of course habeus corpus has been denied the prisoners at guantanamo bay- but since they're muslims, that i suppose is not important to the freedom loving crowd in here)

go find those posts!
have fun kids!

otherwise, you'll just have to complain, and hope the adminstrators here share your worldview- and make me leave-

or learn to live in a pluralistic society-

i guess the proof will be in the pudding-
if i disappear, it will mean the admin agreed with you all-

if i stay- it will mean your accusations are baseless-
which they are-

looks like we have a new group here-

so, the consensus is that 20% of the world's population, who believe the very benign and truthful 5 pillars of faith of islam are lairs?

thats quite a claim!

but this is america kids-
we have freedom of expression, and more importantly- freedom to express our religious beliefs.

so here's how it works-

find posts by myself, where there is a demonstrable lie or inconsistency-
genrerally here- we respect when sources are supplied-

so post the question the alleged lie takes place-
and of course the time and date-

so that it can be located of course-

so, this is a direct challenge to the accusers here-

another little foible in america-
innocent until guilty- facing ones accusers (of course habeus corpus has been denied the prisoners at guantanamo bay- but since they're muslims, that i suppose is not important to the freedom loving crowd in here)

go find those posts!
have fun kids!

otherwise, you'll just have to complain, and hope the adminstrators here share your worldview- and make me leave-

or learn to live in a pluralistic society-

i guess the proof will be in the pudding-
if i disappear, it will mean the admin agreed with you all-

if i stay- it will mean your accusations are baseless-
which they are-

Anonymous : "Victoria can be blocked. It's a matter of contacting the blog owners. It can also be done by someone outside of WaPo who knows more about computers than I do."

???????????????????????????

This would be in violation of the FCC rules and against federal law to prevent the use of someone's electronic device by hacking.

Any banning of any user posting comments should and shall be done by the Washington Post becuse this is their site.

Washington Post reserves the right to make the determination of what and who's comments needs to be blocked.

Jamo:

You can always tell Victoria. The same tone, style, hysteria. She's lied before on other threads and she has been caught.

Thanks to Farnaz for catching her this time.

What if non-U.S. governmental organizations monitor this site 24/7 and use the same moniker in posting whether it is by the same individual or not????? Could explain a lot.

Victoria can be blocked. It's a matter of contacting the blog owners. It can also be done by someone outside of WaPo who knows more about computers than I do.

She needs to be blocked. Victoria is a menace.

The only way to get rid of the lying Victoria is to call her out every time she shows up on a thread.

She's not just sick. She's destructive.

Muslim have enough problem without Victoria. You can ban person from a blog. She should not
post here.

Farnaza:

I think they're all good ideas. The thing is they're beyond Quinn and outside of what she wants from this blog.

Anon is probably right. Serious discussion of matters dealing with religion won't happen on this blog. We'll keep getting major loons and other MPDs like Victoria.

Josh

Victoria

Its foolish of you to pretend this is the first time you've been accused of lying.

Any long time reader of this forum knows you have repeatedly been caught and documented passing off false statements on this board.

You have a pattern. You accuse islamophobe -then say you are insulted and will no longer post until someone apologises. Then you continue posting on another thread.

Its clear you are troubled and have no full-time occupation -other than post here.

Get some therapy and give it a rest..

its a cut and paste- who said otherwise?
how do you get the idea that is plagarism?
how do you "ban" someone from pasting on an internet blog?

this is the best you could come up with in slander?

the islamophobes have found each other-
stay united in your prejudice- how honorable

Victoria should be banned from this blog. She has misrepresented herself, and now she has plagiarized.

Farnaz:

Don't mean to intrude, but a more erudite panel, better management, etc., wouldn't that suggest starting another blog?

Maybe you or someone else could do this. I'll bet a lot of readers would follow you.

Hi Josh,

No, actually, I wasn't thinking of Levinas, but I can see why you would ask. I saw your endorsement of Observer's call for a lucid essay on the interrelations of religion, which I thought a good idea, but your question to me put me in mind of three other possibilites.

1. An essay and questions on neo-Levinasian "theory," to include the face, alterity

2. Have other people, true experts, write the essays, pose the questions

3. Solicit questions from the readers

What do you think?

Farnaz wrote to Jihadist:

Here is the link to Victoria's plagiarized post on Islam.

Appreciating Islam

Thank you, Farnaz.

I followed your directions and found all to be as you said. What is up with this lying Victoria? I don't believe she is anything. She is no Muslim, no Jew, no Christian.

A liar and a thief. That is what she is.

Farnaz:

Yes to the first two, but I haven't read all of Heschel. He's probably the most human being I've ever seen in print. Tough going, though. Didn't know about the poetry. I'll look into it.

When you wrote about the Messiah being a concept to some people, were you thinking of Levinas?

Josh

Hi Josh,

Must go to sleep, but I was wondering if you had read Heschel on the tetragrammaton. I just finished reading everything of his that has been translated into English. (Also, the Christian philosopher Cornel West has written some interesting things on Heschel.)

Did you know that Heschel wrote secular poetry?! It has recently been translated.

Farnaz

Hello Jihadist,

FYI: Meant to write this earlier. Here is the link to Victoria's plagiarized post on Islam.

Appreciating Islam

If this title does not come up as a link, you can simply type it in the address bar; it will come up in the search results.

Click the button on the left titled "The Pillars of Islam," and you will come to the vertaim source of her post. (It takes about thirty-two seconds to find most plagiarized meaterial on the web.)

Do come back and play. CCNL needs someone worthy to argue with (and Victoria is not that person, sad to say.) :)

Best,

Farnaz

CCNL wrote:

"1. Belief in Allah"

"aka as God, Yahweh, Zeus, Jehovah, Mother Nature, etc." should be added to your cleansing neurons.

YHWH and other variants are the tetragrammaton. This business of referring to "belief" in the tetragrammaton developed with nineteenth century religious "scholars" who assimilated other religions to Christianity. The idea of belief in the tetragrammaton is anthropomorphic nonsense, oxymoronic,intellectually insulting.

With a Ph.D. in the Hebrew Bible, you should know this. I would think that despite whatever you may have been taught back in the day, you were given the tools to pursue further research. It's important to understand the subjectivity of other people's beliefs regardless of what you might think.

Take this from an atheist.

Another Kafr writes

There is only one thing Victoria has proven herself to be post after post:

she's a liar..

You are right. As was the case with this last post of hers. On another thread someone wrote that she was a hater. Both are true. One cannot say for sure what religion, if any, she adheres to, certainly not Islam.

But she is a hater. There is enormous beauty in the Christain faith, indeed in all three of the Abrahamic religions. This question deals with the resurrection of Jesus Christ, whom, as I mentioned does not figure in Judaism, which is rigorously, absolutely monotheistic. The deity is not incarnated, is not to be confused with human beings--almost above all not that, since it goes to idolatry. There are many, many names for God in the Bible, depending on the occasion, the aspect, etc., but the deity cannot be limited, even given a definitive name. Hashem = (the) name. The vast differences between Judaism and Christianity notwithstanding, my own studies of the latter notwithstanding, I can say that hate and lying do not belong in posts dealing with matters such as this.

More and more pluralism is developing in Christianity as Former Christian notes. The same is true of Judaism, of course. Reconstructionist Judaism which locates religions historically even allows for disbelief in a deity. Belief, disbelief are difficult questions throughout Judaism, often irrelevant. For many, the notion of Messiah is a concept rather than a human being.
What is true throughout is that the beliefs of nonJews are their own affair, not to be interfered with, challenged, etc.

Hate, lying, creating conflict, David wrote eloquently on those matters.

Hate and lying should have no place on this thread. They should have no place on threads dealing with Judaism, Islam, Animism, etc. Indeed, they should have no place anywhere.

I don't really like to call Victoria a hater and a liar. Perhaps we can say that she hates and lies in her posts. Perhaps, we can hope that she finds her way.

Farnaz

There is only one thing Victoria has proven herself to be post after post:

she's a liar..

hi lib- thanks, you're right on schedule!

i had considered posting the 5 pillars of faith- but decided against it as i know the shahada(testimony and public delaration of faith) is sufficient.

but- you inspired me, as you always do-

1) Faith | 2) Prayer | 3) The 'Zakat'
4) The Fast | 5) Pilgrimage (Hajj)

They are the framework of the Muslim life: faith, prayer, concern for the needy, self-purification, and the pilgrimage to Makkah for those who are able.

1) FAITH

There is no god worthy of worship except God and Muhammad is His messenger. This declaration of faith is called the Shahada, a simple formula which all the faithful pronounce. In Arabic, the first part is la ilaha illa Llah - 'there is no god except God'; ilaha (god) can refer to anything which we may be tempted to put in place of God - wealth, power, and the like. Then comes illa Llah: 'except God', the source of all Creation. The second part of the Shahada is Muhammadun rasulu'Llah: 'Muhammad is the messenger of God.' A message of guidance has come through a man like ourselves.

2) PRAYER ( Prayer Performance )

Salat is the name for the obligatory prayers which are performed five times a day, and are a direct link between the worshipper and God. There is no hierarchical authority in Islam, and no priests, so the prayers are led by a learned person who knows the Quran, chosen by the congregation. These five prayers contain verses from the Quran, and are said in Arabic, the language of the Revelation, but personal supplication can be offered in one's own language.

Prayers are said at dawn, noon, mid-afternoon, sunset and nightfall, and thus determine the rhythm of the entire day. Although it is preferable to worship together in a mosque, a Muslim may pray almost anywhere, such as in fields, offices, factories and universities. Visitors to the Muslim world are struck by the centrality of prayers in daily life.

A translation of the Call to Prayer is:

God is most great. God is most great.
God is most great. God is most great.
I testify that there is no god except God.
I testify that there is no god except God.
I testify that Muhammad is the messenger of God.
I testify that Muhammad is the messenger of God.
Come to prayer! Come to prayer!
Come to success (in this life and the Hereafter)!
Come to success!
God is most great. God is most great.
There is no god except God.

3) THE 'ZAKAT'
One of the most important principles of Islam is that all things belong to God, and that wealth is therefore held by human beings in trust. The word zakat means both 'purification' and 'growth'. Our possessions are purified by setting aside a proportion for those in need, and, like the pruning of plants, this cutting back balances and encourages new growth.

Each Muslim calculates his or her own zakat individually. For most purposes this involves the payment each year of two and a half percent of one's capital.

A pious person may also give as much as he or she pleases as sadaqa, and does so preferably in secret. Although this word can be translated as 'voluntary charity' it has a wider meaning. The Prophet said 'even meeting your brother with a cheerful face is charity.'

The Prophet(pbuh) said: 'Charity is a necessity for every Muslim. ' He was asked: 'What if a person has nothing?' The Prophet(pbuh) replied: 'He should work with his own hands for his benefit and then give something out of such earnings in charity.' The Companions asked: 'What if he is not able to work?' The Prophet(pbuh) said: 'He should help poor and needy persons.' The Companions further asked 'What if he cannot do even that?' The Prophet(pbuh) said 'He should urge others to do good.' The Companions said 'What if he lacks that also?' The Prophet(pbuh) said 'He should check himself from doing evil. That is also charity.'

4) THE FAST
Every year in the month of Ramadan, all Muslims fast from first light until sundown, abstaining from food, drink, and sexual relations. Those who are sick, elderly, or on a journey, and women who are pregnant or nursing are permitted to break the fast and make up an equal number of days later in the year. If they are physically unable to do this, they must feed a needy person for every day missed. Children begin to fast (and to observe the prayer) from puberty, although many start earlier.

Although the fast is most beneficial to the health, it is regarded principally as a method of self purification. By cutting oneself off from worldly comforts, even for a short time, a fasting person gains true sympathy with those who go hungry as well as growth in one's spiritual life.

5) PILGRIMAGE (HAJJ)
The annual pilgrimage to Makkah - the Hajj - is an obligation only for those who are physically and financially able to perform it. Nevertheless, about two million people go to Makkah each year from every corner of the globe providing a unique opportunity for those of different nations to meet one another. Although Makkah is always filled with visitors, the annual Hajj begins in the twelfth month of the Islamic year (which is lunar, not solar, so that Hajj and Ramadan fall sometimes in summer, sometimes in winter). Pilgrims wear special clothes: simple garments which strip away distinctions of class and culture, so that all stand equal before God.

Pilgrims praying at the mosque in Makkah.
The rites of the Hajj, which are of Abrahamic origin, include circling the Ka'ba seven times, and going seven times between the mountains of Safa and Marwa as did Hagar during her search for water. Then the pilgrims stand together on the wide plain of Arafa and join in prayers for God's forgiveness, in what is often thought of as a preview of the Last Judgment.

In previous centuries the Hajj was an arduous undertaking. Today, however, Saudi Arabia provides millions of people with water, modern transport, and the most up-to-date health facilities.

The close of the Hajj is marked by a festival, the Eid al-Adha, which is celebrated with prayers and the exchange of gifts in Muslim communities everywhere. This, and the Eid al-Fitr, a feast-day commemorating the end of Ramadan, are the main festivals of the Muslim calendar.

thanks lib, for giving me an opportunity to clarify the basic premise of islamic faith.

Victoria,

How goes the Deprogramming of your Islamic brainwashing???

Instead of the Five Steps, how about just three to get you started on the right path?

Using "The 77 Branches of Islamic "faith" a collection compiled by Imam Bayhaqi as a starting point. In it, he explains the essential virtues that reflect true "faith" (iman) through related Qur’anic verses and Prophetic sayings." i.e. a nice summary of the Koran and Islamic beliefs.

"1. Belief in Allah"

"aka as God, Yahweh, Zeus, Jehovah, Mother Nature, etc." should be added to your cleansing neurons.

"2. To believe that everything other than Allah was non-existent. Thereafter, Allah Most High created these things and subsequently they came into existence."

Evolution and the Big Bang or the "Gib Gnab" (when the universe starts to recycle) are more plausible and the "akas" for Allah should be included if you continue to be a "creationist".

"3. To believe in the existence of angels."

A major item for neuron cleansing. Angels/devils are the mythical creations of ancient civilizations, e.g. Hittites, to explain/define natural events, contacts with their gods, big birds, sudden winds, protectors during the dark nights, etc. No "pretty/ugly wingy thingies" ever visited or talked to Mohammed, Jesus, Mary or Joseph or Joe Smith. Today we would classify angels as fairies and "tinker bells". Modern devils are classified as the demons of the demented.

oops, cleary that was me, victoria again-

hello again farnaz-

you seem quite concerned with my religious identity-

and have made several incongruous claims of things i've said- which, of course- i never did-

when concerned the christian now liberated comes in to clarify who i am- you KNOW you must be confused (half his posts are directed to me- he's very concerned about my spiritual welfare it seems)

when he informed you, that i am a muslim- which indeed i most vociferously testify to- you responded with-

"If Victoria is a Muslim, I am an Animist."
MARCH 24 6:19PM

and then made this absurd claim that i said it myself!

"She says she is a Christian, not a Muslim. That, I now think, is possible."
MARCH 25 5:07AM

and then, skewing all reason, and directly contradicting your own self-in the same post you asserted- again erroneously!

"Amidst the comments responding to a diffent question is one from her claiming that she is a Jew. I took her at her word. However, her reply to me now suggests that either she is of Jewish parentage and knows nothing about Judaism, which is possible, or that she is a Christian, as she asserts."
MARCH 25 5:07AM

really? to use your own phrase... interesting.

so, you've stated 2x wrongly what i am-
and 2x wrongly what i am not!

your powers of observation in the matter of my identification seem somewhat unconscious-

while you spoke condescendingly to jihadist for not knowing your sex based upon your name-

ive had you pegged and identified from the outset-

you want to hit me withyour talent at argument?

a highly questionable "talent" to boast- debates are more welcome- marguments are so emotonally driven and devoid of logic-

go for it dude-

as for this continued silliness- and your further assertion-

"Victoria is not a Muslim. I would be happy to demonstrate."
MARCH 25 4:38AM

so demonstrate already!

I TESTIFY THAT THERE IS NO GOD, BUT (THE GOD) ALLAH.
I TESTIFY THAT MUHAMMAD(PEACE AND BLESSINGS BE UPON HIM) IS THE MESSENGER OF (THE GOD) ALLAH.

i hope this settles your confusion.

FARNAZ-
i take it as a compliment that you seem able to so easily slide me into so many skins.

the only info we have to go on, is your allusion to witnessing suffering-

we are all witnesses to suffering- its not the same as experiencing it ourselves-

when we experience it ourselves (again, we all do) the importance of that suffering is, does it polish the mirror of our hearts, and do we become better, more humane and compassionate people because of it?

do we learn the lessons our suffering is teaching us?

or do we crystallize it into a hard ball and use it as an excuse to justify previous prejudices and hatreds?

we all make these choices of how we react and respond to it every day.

no one's suffering is more important- than anyone elses.
what makes us outstanding is if we visibly grow from it.

i initially responded to you because you were trying to hijack the conversation towards your own agenda- which does not have good intentions- is not edifying anyone- and was interrupting the christians who came in to share their beliefs.

what is a bit sad- is you cannot seem to pinpoint my identity- and hence project what you think my agenda may be.

and without that- you seem at a loss as to how to attack me-

as if that were even necessary-

i just read all of your posts- and it saddened me a bit-
i get no pleasure from watching you twist around as you try to figure me out-

did it never occur to you that i may simply have the intention of fairness and peace?

i'm hardly your enemy- we don't know each other- and most people who've been here are very aware of my religious idnetification, as im very very vocal in its support and exhortation.

peace

What is so wrong with humans?

God, the perfect and intelligent designer created humans for them to be happy and for him to enjoy his creation. But then something bad happened. Scholars say that it was the “free will” that screwed thing badly.

Then the infinite and all powerful Designer solved the problem declaring all his creation tinted with sin. The humans were evicted from paradise.

Later on, when humans had multiplied , the Designer saw horrible flaws in their behavior, maybe caused again by the “free will”, and took drastic measures: drowned all but a small group of humans to clean the mess. Something like a extreme recall today when a product do not perform in the market as expected.

But that did not cleaned the mess. More extreme measures were needed. The perfect Designer himself, or at least a third of Him, had to go down to earth and become a very imperfect human in order to save the humans. Then he has to suffer immensely and be crucified to accomplish his mission. Which he did.

You would believe that then all humans ware completely saved, but no. More is needed. Humans apparently can’t be fixed that easy. Here are some of the things humans must do to really be saved (quote from a poster in other thread):

having been baptized,
repenting of past sins,
trusting Jesus as their Lord and Savior,
believing that Jesus is the Son of God,
believing that Jesus was resurrected,
doing good works,
following church rituals and sacraments, and/or
avoiding certain specific behaviors.

What is so wrong with humans?

Peace to all and best wishes,

JAC

Jihadist,

If you are afraid that I am a Muslim, fear not. If you are afraid I am knowledgeagle in Islam, that is another matter. As for Victoria, you ask why I do not take her at her word. She says she is a Christian, not a Muslim. That, I now think, is possible.

Amidst the comments responding to a diffent question is one from her claiming that she is a Jew. I took her at her word. However, her reply to me now suggests that either she is of Jewish parentage and knows nothing about Judaism, which is possible, or that she is a Christian, as she asserts. Also, I could be very wrong, as in some ways I was about you, but my guess is that Former Christian knew she could not be observant or even literate in Judaism in the same way I did.

Christ and the resurrection are not relevant to Judaism. There is no reference to Christ in Judaism. Further, Judaism is not a supersessionist religion. It does not employ either Christian or Muslim style typology. It does not seek converts. Anyone wishing to convert may do so, and from the time that he or she does, it is forbidden to speak of that person as a convert, but conversion is a personal decision. It is content within itself, and I mean no offense by this. Also, regardless of one's denomination, Judaism holds that God (Adonai, in this context) has a covenant with all peoples. It is not for Jews to judge or evaluate. The extent to which Jews maintain their own covenant is what is at issue. Whether or not Christians believe in the resurrection is up to them.

I will say that I have studied Christianity, have my own thoughts on it, that I have studied other religions, as well. I can, therefore, say that
like Islam, and unlike Christianity, Judaism is not a confessional religion. It is a way of life. It does not hinge on belief in the way that Christianity does.

But, you know, even if Ahmed from Bahrain were to write in saying that Moses, our teacher, had been resurrected, I would not be offended. I would think him confused, but I would not be offended.

Farnaz

Dear Jihadist,

Victoria is not a Muslim. I would be happy to demonstrate. But whence this great concern? Or is it the legitimacy of your own self-representation that you feel needs defending?

As for my being offended by the idea of the resurrection, I cannot fathom what you are referring to. As I mentioned, I have no problem with Ahmed. Why should I? As far as I am concerned, religion is a private matter. Islam has a problem with the resurrection, as you presumably know.

I will say this. I have no desire for you to be moved by what I told you or to believe me. I have given testimony and documented what occurred with us. I have done this along with thousands and thousands of others. My journey out of hell is complete. Your belief or disbelief changes nothing.

I suppose what surprises me is that you did not appear to know what has happened or is happening in Iran. Setting aside Jews and Christians fot the moment, how could you not know of the plight of the Bahai, now in the hands of the UN, which will do nothing, of course. It is hardly a secret. If I have time in the next couple of days, I'll post links. Come to think of it, links on our exile might be educative as well.

The exile of the Jews and many Christians from their homelands is not shrouded in secrecy. The same situation prevails in Egypt.

Egypt, Syria, Yemen, Iraq, Iran, etc. From these Muslim countries we have been driven. I am speaking of people, who, like my family, lived in these countries for centuries. We are now three million in exile. Our lands, our homes, in many cases, our lives were taken from us.

Odd...OUR right of return is never discussed. Odd. . .Very odd...

How, on earth, could you not know about it? You have access to the internet. . . .

Now, Jihadist, I await your response to my question on the Quarayza Jews. Frankly, there is no one who has read the Qu'ran who cannot answer it.

I am sorry you have chosen to quarrel with me. I am quite good at this sort of thing. But it is tedious and tiresome.

Farnaz

RandomsAndThoughts - why should the Post or any secular newspaper have any obligation to report on the beliefs of any religion as if it were factual? Newspapers report events. The event on Easter is that Christians are celebrating it. Not that Jesus rose from the dead. That's a belief, for which there is no evidence. For a newspaper, a religious holiday is simply a day that people of a particular religion celebrate their beliefs. That's it.

Mr Mark - thanks for watching those shows so I didn't have to.

I got some terms mixed up - in my first post on resurrection I equated "the Father" with "a beardy man in the sky", and pointed out that this notion can be refuted.
The refutation (i.e. the preposition that Jesus's followers raised him) implies "the divine in mankind", which leads to a redefinition of "the Father" as "the divine in mankind". This definition also explains him as both son of man and son of god i.e. man(kind) is divine.
(So I'm going along with it)

Oh there "Reality Challenged" and Obfuscating Jihadist,

Hmmm, "off you go"?? Again into your world of denial, denial that your religion, as are all religions, is greatly flawed? Please as you go off this time, consider addressing the flaws of Islam. I present the first four here once again so you can print them out and contemplate them on your journey:

1. Belief in "pretty/ugly wingie thingies".

2. Belief that an hallucinating, illiterate Arab did actually talk to the "pretty Gabriel" in the hot "Gabe" cave and therein received the warmongering and anti-female words and resultant laws now listed in the koran.

3. That Sunnis are superior to Shiites in all aspects of life. And Shiites think the same way about Sunnis.

4. That Islam is perfect and the koran inherently condones no sin even though the 24/7, 800 year-old blood feud between Sunnis and Shiites gives significant credence that greed, hate, suicides, assassinations, maiming, and murder are condoned by the koran. Having multiple wives also gives significant credence to the sins of rape, adultery, lust and polygamy. The condoned treatment of these wives gives credence that the koran allows the sins of hatred, anger and greed.

stan:
It looks pretty consistent to me. "Son of God" would refer to him being divine. "Son of Man" would refer to other men (i.e. mankind) being divine.
He also says it explicitly (John 10:34)

Hello Farnaz,

Thanks for your posts. I was moved by them until I read one from you addressed to Former Christian which stated:

"If Victoria is a Muslim, I am an Animist."

Come now. Was that really necessary? I can imagine your reaction if someone else said something along that line to you.

I take you as an Iranian Jew as you said you are here. Why can't you take her as a Muslim as she said so here?

Is there something we should know? Or are you pulling our legs with some telling slips in your posts?

You are the first Jewish person offended by questions on the Resurrection. Usually, it was Christians who got irate and took me aside when I stated matter of factly in other posts in other threads on other questions, that Muslims don't believe in the Trinity, the Original Sin, the Resurrection etc.

Only GaryD and Soja from Australia answered this question in a way that made me admire and respect them on their faith and belief.

All the best. Am going off.

Thanks again.

"J"

The gospel writings have Jesus referring to himself as "Son of Man" and others referring to him as "Son of God".

If you assume that an organization wrote the books over many years and fine tuned them as they went along, things fit together better. One of the things that seems to be consistent in most of the religious writings is a statement is made that can not be true then it is maintained that it is true. The same concept was used for the Iraq War and the Weapons of Mass Destruction.

Since religious groups are binding together for political purposes should not the religious concepts be subject to a court of law? People are required to tell the truth to the government; if then they make a religous statement that cannot be true to the government is that not then lying and committing perjury to the government??
Should "I have faith that it is true" provide cover?

Converting our nation into a theocracy would certainly create problems for our system of government.

RPC
Yes, all what you say is fine but before builidng a house one needs to build a solid foundation. That solid foundation is perfecting this life first. Take a look around you. Are you happy with what has befallen our lot?

Surely not. Then let us be an instrument of change. First change our own hearts, then reach out to anyone who listens and the world would be a better place.

Then we can talk about whether Jesus returned in person after death. Up until such time that we have a world full of hatred ad killing stories of Jesus are conjecture, no more. After we achieve peace and love, all such stories about Jesus shall become truth itself, clear as daylight.

Peace

Athena,
Thank you for the comment. As Perspective so eloquently commented below(March 23, 2008 4:09 PM )there are a variety of theories concerning the role of consciousness and how the "reality" of the material explicate universe interacts with consciousness. If you are interested in the current philosophical thought surrounding the evolution of consciousness combined with both the experiential traditions such as Sufism, Buddhism, Gnosticism, etc. and modern psychology, I suggest the integral philosopher Ken Wilbur and consciousness guru Andrew Cohen. Both of these forward thinkers contribute to a magazine, "What is Enlightenment"
http://www.wie.org
For an excellent website concerning the theoretical physics of a timeless universe I recommend:
http://www.everythingforever.com

For a view into the fascinating world of the role of consciousness within the enigmatic theory of quantum mechanics, I suggest "The Self Aware Universe" by Amit Goswami.(as explained by Perspective below)
The following are excerpts of an interview with Dr. Amit Goswami, a theoretical physicist who wrote the book, “The Self Aware Universe”.

“How it started happening first was that quantum objects—objects in quantum physics—began to be looked upon as waves of possibility. They are not waves in space and time. They cannot be called waves in space and time at all—they have properties which do not jibe with those of ordinary waves. So they began to be recognized as waves in potential, waves of possibility, and the potential was recognized as transcendent, beyond matter somehow.”

“In quantum physics objects are not seen as definite things, as we are used to seeing them. Newton taught us that objects are definite things, they can be seen all the time, moving in definite trajectories. Quantum physics doesn't depict objects that way at all. In quantum physics, objects are seen as possibilities, possibility waves. So then the question arises, what converts possibility into actuality? Because, when we see, we only see actual events. That's starting with us. When you see a chair, you see an actual chair, you don't see a possible chair.”

“Now this is called the "quantum measurement paradox." It is a paradox because who are we to do this conversion? Because after all, in the materialist paradigm we don't have any causal efficacy. We are nothing but the brain, which is made up of atoms and elementary particles. So how can a brain which is made up of atoms and elementary particles convert a possibility wave that it itself is? It itself is made up of the possibility waves of atoms and elementary particles, so it cannot convert its own possibility wave into actuality. This is called a paradox. Now in the new view, consciousness is the ground of being. So who converts possibility into actuality? Consciousness does, because consciousness does not obey quantum physics. Consciousness is not made of material. Consciousness is transcendent. The material world of quantum physics is just possibility. It is consciousness, through the conversion of possibility into actuality, that creates what we see manifest. In other words, consciousness creates the manifest world.”

As someone who is attempting to integrate the essences of the various spiritual traditions and experiences with the radical new theories emerging through theoretical physics and consciousness psychology, my zazen practice has "awakened" me somewhat to the subtle nature of our pure consciousness which unfolds from the implicate order. Theoretical physicist David Bohm's "Wholeness and Implicate Order" is an amazing attempt at a unification of the theories of relativity and quantum mechanics including the role of consciousness. While some of his conclusions differ from Amit Goswami, both men have ventured far beyond the limitations inherent in the super paradigm of pure materialism.

Former Christian,

If Victoria is a Muslim, I am an Animist.

Farnaz

The short answer:

(1 Corinthians 15:12-19) Now if Christ is being preached that he has been raised up from the dead, how is it some among YOU say there is no resurrection of the dead? 13 If, indeed, there is no resurrection of the dead, neither has Christ been raised up. 14 But if Christ has not been raised up, our preaching is certainly in vain, and our faith is in vain. 15 Moreover, we are also found false witnesses of God, because we have borne witness against God that he raised up the Christ, but whom he did not raise up if the dead are really not to be raised up. 16 For if the dead are not to be raised up, neither has Christ been raised up. 17 Further, if Christ has not been raised up, YOUR faith is useless; YOU are yet in YOUR sins. 18 In fact, also, those who fell asleep [in death] in union with Christ perished. 19 If in this life only we have hoped in Christ, we are of all men most to be pitied.

The long answer:
From the very beginning the resurrection of Jesus met with doubt and disbelief. To the Jews in general, it was blasphemous for Jesus' followers to claim that this impaled man was the Messiah. And to most educated Greeks, with their belief in the immortality of the soul, the very idea of a resurrection was repugnant.—Acts 17:32-34.
In recent years, some scholars who profess to be Christians have published books and articles dismissing Jesus' resurrection as a fable and have initiated a fierce debate over this subject. In their search for "the historical Jesus," various scholars argue that the Gospel accounts of the empty tomb and Jesus' post-resurrection appearances are pure fiction, devised long after his death in order to support claims of his heavenly power.
In short, many scholars reduce the Bible accounts about the resurrected Jesus to a series of subjective experiences that produced in the disciples a renewed sense of spiritual self-confidence and missionary zeal.
Even though, many have little interest in academic skirmishes, a discussion of Jesus' resurrection should be of concern to all of us. If he was not resurrected, Christianity is based on a false foundation. On the other hand, if Jesus' resurrection is really a fact of history, Christianity is based on truth. Under those circumstances, not only are Christ's claims vindicated but so are his promises. Moreover, if there is a resurrection, death is not the great victor but an enemy that can be defeated.—1 Corinthians 15:55.
If Jesus was not literally resurrected, Jesus' disciples would probably have disappeared like the followers of the many would-be Messiahs. According to the Scriptures, Jesus appeared to his followers on several occasions shortly after his death.
"For a fact the Lord was raised up!"—Luke 24:34.
The disciples were called upon to defend their faith in Jesus as the Messiah. In doing so, they especially pointed to his resurrection from the dead as solid proof of his Messiahship.
"with great power the apostles continued giving forth the witness concerning the resurrection of the Lord Jesus."—Acts 4:33.
If anyone had ever proved that this resurrection was a fraud—perhaps by getting one of the disciples to admit that it was or by showing that Jesus' body remained in the tomb—Christianity would have failed at the start. But it did not. Knowing that Christ was alive, Jesus' followers went everywhere proclaiming his resurrection, and multitudes became believers in the risen Christ.
There is ample evidence that this was an actual event.
All four Gospel accounts report on Jesus' resurrection. (Matthew 28:1-10; Mark 16:1-8; Luke 24:1-12; John 20:1-29) Other portions of the Christian Greek Scriptures speak with certainty about the raising of Christ from death.
The real question is, how does Jesus’ resurrection affect mankind? Jesus prayed: "This means everlasting life, their taking in knowledge of you, the only true God, and of the one whom you sent forth, Jesus Christ." (John 17:3)
By acquiring life-giving knowledge of Jesus and of his Father and by applying such knowledge, even if we should die, we ourselves can be resurrected, since Jesus was. (John 5:28, 29) We can have the hope of everlasting life on a paradise earth under God's heavenly Kingdom in the hands of his glorified Son, Jesus Christ, the King of kings.—Isaiah 9:6, 7; Luke 23:43; Revelation 17:14.
So, then, the question of whether Jesus actually rose from the dead is crucial. It affects our life now and our prospects for the future. There are four lines of evidence that Jesus died and was resurrected.
1. Jesus really died on the stake.
Some skeptics claim that, though impaled, Jesus did not really die on the stake. They hold that he was only near death and that he was revived by the coolness of the tomb. Yet, every source available proves that it was the lifeless body of Jesus that was placed in the tomb.
Since Jesus was executed publicly, there were witnesses to the fact that he actually died on the stake. His death was certified by the centurion in charge of the execution. That army officer was a professional whose job included determining that death had taken place. Moreover, only after confirming that Jesus had died did the Roman Governor Pontius Pilate release Jesus' body to Joseph of Arimathea for interment.—Mark 15:39-46.
2. The tomb was found empty.
The empty tomb gave the disciples their first proof of Jesus' resurrection, and this evidence remains undisputed. Jesus was buried in a new tomb, one that had never been used. It was near the place of impalement and back then could unmistakably be located very easily. (John 19:41, 42) All the Gospel accounts agree that when Jesus' friends arrived at the tomb on the second morning after his death, his body was gone.—Matthew 28:1-7; Mark 16:1-7; Luke 24:1-3; John 20:1-10.
The empty tomb was astonishing to Jesus' enemies, just as it was to his friends. His foes had long been working to see him dead and buried. Having accomplished their goal, they took pains to post a guard and seal the tomb. Nevertheless, on the morning of the first day of the week, it was empty.
It’s unlikely that Jesus' friends would have taken his body from the tomb since the Gospels show that they were greatly distressed after his execution. Furthermore, his disciples would hardly have gone on to suffer persecution and death for something they knew to be fraudulent.
Jesus' enemies would have been the least likely to have taken the body. Even if they had, they would certainly have produced it later so as to refute the disciples' claims that Jesus had been resurrected and was alive.
Weeks later, Jesus' enemies did not rise up with an overwhelming rebuttal when Peter testified: "Men of Israel, hear these words: Jesus the Nazarene, a man publicly shown by God to you through powerful works and portents and signs that God did through him in your midst, just as you yourselves know, this man, as one delivered up by the determined counsel and foreknowledge of God, you fastened to a stake by the hand of lawless men and did away with. But God resurrected him by loosing the pangs of death, because it was not possible for him to continue to be held fast by it. For David says respecting him, 'I had Jehovah constantly before my eyes . . . Moreover, even my flesh will reside in hope; because you will not leave my soul in Hades, neither will you allow your loyal one to see corruption.'"—Acts 2:22-27.
3. Many saw the resurrected Jesus.
In the book of Acts, the Gospel writer Luke stated: "To [the apostles] also by many positive proofs [Jesus] showed himself alive after he had suffered, being seen by them throughout forty days and telling the things about the kingdom of God." (Acts 1:2, 3) A number of disciples saw the resurrected Jesus on various occasions—in a garden, on a road, during a meal, by the Sea of Tiberias.—Matthew 28:8-10; Luke 24:13-43; John 21:1-23.
Critics question the veracity of these appearances. They say that the writers fabricated the accounts, or they cite seeming discrepancies in them. Actually, minor variations in the Gospel accounts prove that there was no collusion involved. Our knowledge of Jesus is broadened when one writer supplies details that supplement other accounts of certain incidents in the earthly life of Christ.
Some critics claim that Jesus' post-resurrection appearances were hallucinations. Any argument along those lines is implausible, since he was seen by so many people. Among them were fishermen, women, a civil servant, and even the doubting apostle Thomas, who was convinced only when he saw the irrefutable proof that Jesus had been raised from the dead. (John 20:24-29) On several occasions, disciples of Jesus did not at first recognize their resurrected Lord. Once, over 500 people saw him, most of whom were still alive when the apostle Paul used that incident as evidence in his defense of the resurrection.—1 Corinthians 15:6.
4. The living Jesus has an affect on people.
Since the first century, countless individuals have turned from indifference or total opposition to Christianity to absolute certainty that it is the true religion. A study of the Scriptures proved to them that God resurrected Jesus to life as a glorious spirit creature in heaven. (Philippians 2:8-11) They have exercised faith in Jesus and in Jehovah God's provision for salvation through Christ's ransom sacrifice. (Romans 5:8) Such individuals have found genuine happiness by doing God's will and living in harmony with Jesus' teachings.
Consider what it meant to be a Christian in the first century. There was no gain in prestige, power, or wealth. Many early Christians 'joyfully took the plundering of their belongings' for the sake of their faith. (Hebrews 10:34) Christianity called for a life of sacrifice and persecution that in many cases ended in martyrdom.
Before becoming Christ's followers, some had good prospects as far as prestige and wealth were concerned. Saul of Tarsus studied under the renowned Law teacher Gamaliel and was beginning to distinguish himself in the eyes of the Jews. (Acts 9:1, 2; 22:3; Galatians 1:14) Yet, Saul became the apostle Paul. He and many others turned their back on the prestige and power that this world offered in order to spread a message of true hope based on God's promises and on the fact that Jesus Christ had been resurrected from the dead. (Colossians 1:28) They were willing to suffer for a cause they knew to be founded on truth.
The same is true of millions today.

ZBOB and others - thank you for your fascinating insights. While I am no physicist (and I don't claim to understand about half of what you're saying), I'm interested in the concepts that you're putting forward. My husband and I were having similar discussions this past weekend. A book that I've been reading posits that what we call "God" (or Higher Consciousness, Gods, Loa, etc.) is actually another dimension. Human beings can access this "God Dimension" by meditation, mass focused energy, trance states, etc. Is this in line with what you are saying?

BTW - Happy Easter/Purim/Ostara/Nawruz to all!

So, "Father in Heaven" refers to the divine in man(kind), rather than a beardy man in the sky.

(This site's anti-spam filter is getting on my nerves - all messages shorter than 10 words disappear. What I wrote is this)

Son of Man's Father is Man. Man comes from mankind.

Angela,

All of your Christian "beliefs" are actually myths, embellishments, superstitions or lies because they come from a bible the suffers from these same gigantic flaws.

e.g. the reality of the supposed physical resurrection of Jesus:

From an analyses of the documents by many contemporary NT exegetes:

The Resurrection is fiction i.e. it was added to make Jesus akin to the Caesars and Greek half gods/half men

(1a) Mark 8:31-33 = Matt 16:2l-23 = Luke 9:22, (1b) Mark 9:9b = Matt 17:9b, (1c) Mark 9:12b = Matt 17:12b, (1d) Mark 9:30-32= Matt 17:22-23 = Luke 9:43b-45, (1e) Luke 17:25, (1f) Mark 10:32-34 = Matt 20:17-19 = Luke 18:31-34, (1g) Matt 26:1-2, (1h) Mark 14:21 = Matt 26:24 = Luke 22:22, (1i) Mark 14:41= Matt 26:45b,(1j) Luke 24:7

Conclusion: Many references but only a single attestation and from the Second stratum (60-80 AD).

http://wiki.faithfutures.org/index.php/017_Resurrection_of_Jesus

From the course notes of a large Catholic university's graduate theology class:

"Heaven is a Spirit state (no physical bodies abide)

Christ's and Mary's bodies are therefore not in Heaven. For one thing, Paul in 1 Cor 15 speaks of the body of the dead as transformed into a "spiritual body." No one knows exactly what he meant by this term.

Most believe that it to mean that the personal spiritual self that survives death is in continuity with the self we were while living on earth as an embodied person.

The physical Resurrection (meaning a resuscitated corpse returning to life), Ascension (of Jesus' crucified corpse), and Assumption (Mary's
corpse) into heaven did not take place.

The Ascension symbolizes the end of Jesus' earthly ministry and the beginning of the Church.

Only Luke's Gospel records it. The Assumption ties Jesus' mission to Pentecost and missionary activity of Jesus' followers The Assumption has
multiple layers of symbolism, some are related to Mary's special role as "Christ bearer" (theotokos). It does not seem fitting that Mary, the body of Jesus' Virgin-Mother (another biblically based symbol found in Luke 1) would
be derived by worms upon her death. Mary's assumption also shows God's positive regard, not only for Christ's male body, but also for female
bodies."

Amazing how this agrees with Professor Crossan and many other contemporary NT exegetes' conclusions based on attestations and stratums.

Some added thoughts:

According to Reimarus as referenced in R.B. Stewart in his introduction to the recent book, The Resurrection of Jesus, Crossan and Wright in Dialogue,

"Reimarus (1774-1779) posits that Jesus became sidetracked by embracing a political position, sought to force God's hand and that he died alone deserted by his disciples. What began as a call for repentance ended up as a misguided attempt to usher in the earthly political kingdom of God. After Jesus' failure and death, his disciples stole his body and declared his resurrection in order to maintain their financial security and ensure themselves some standing."

From: K.C. Hanson and D. E. Oakman, Palestine in the Time of Jesus, Fortress Press, 1998. p.55

"Stories circulated to the effect that Alexander of Macedonia was not only the son of Philip II, but also of the god Zeus-Ammon (Plutarch, Parallel Lives, "Alexander" 2.1-3.2); Plato was the son of Ariston and the god Apollo (Diogenes Laertius, Lives of Eminent Philosophers 3.1-2), and Augustus was the son of Octavius as well as the god Apollo (Suetonius, Lives o f the Caesars 2.4.1-7). The extraordinary character of these elites reputedly stemmed from both their divine origins and their kingroups. Their kin-groups provided one form of legitimation-political right to the throne and/or social status (thus the importance of Joseph in Matthew's genealogy). Their divine procreation provided another: their honor was divinely ascribed, and their greatness as leaders derived from divine paternity."

I don't think so. Remove the fantasy and the whole thing crumbles, doesn't it?

Reading through these posts, I am once again amazed at the amount of slack Joe Q Public cuts for belief in Jesus' existence and the laughable idea of him dying and being resurrected. The suspension of disbelief is frightening.

I spent part of the weekend watching programs on the History and Discovery channels. There was a whole lot of "Bible fare" being televised, and again, the amount of slack being cut for the Biblical fantasy is unbelievable.

I watched a show on the Exodus that spent 56 minutes offering "proof" that it "could have happened" the way the Bible said. At minute 56, we got the disclaimer that there is not a scintilla of proof available ANYWHERE to support ANY ASPECT of the Biblical account. Not the bondage, not the plagues and certainly not 40 years of wandering in the desert. Indeed, the copious historic records of the Egyptians lead any sensible person to believe the entire exodus story is a lie.

After the rationalists made their point, the religious-minded were given a final chance at damage control at minute 58, whereupon they floated the old "faith doesn't require proof" and "the lesson of the Exodus is powerful whether it happened or not" canards.

OK. If you say so. I just wonder why the disclaimer wasn't given at the beginning of the program...and I also wonder what lesson is to be drawn from the racist (Egyptians made slaves of the Hebrews. They didn't) mouse-that-roared (little Israel defeats big bad Egypt. Didn't happen, either) story when the whole thing is a lie.

On another show (this time on some religious channel), I learn that there are "at least 9 non-Biblical sources that attest to the fact that Christ lived." As expected, Josephus' name is tossed out, but there's no discussion of the fact that the texts in question are 4th-century forgeries. In fact, the TF isn't even discussed. Next, they drag out Tacitus and the often-quoted passage from his Annals. They didn't bother mentioning that the passage from Tacitus is simply Tacitus regurgitating info he got from others about the Christians. Neither do they point out the blunder that Tacitus thought "Christus" was the surname of Jesus, rather than his title.

This particular show didn't bother naming the other 7 sources. I guess they were depending on the mien of the on-screen pastor-like apologist to provide enough sincerity to make most believers nod their heads in agreement (take that!, you mean archaeologists and historians!).

In another show, I learned that Herod the Great died in 4AD. History says he died in 4BC, but I guess if you're pushing the Bible story and the flight to Egypt on your "documentary" that you need to change dates to make it all work out. It would be pretty difficult for Herod to order the slaughter of all newborns if he had been dead for 4-5 years. But then, what's 8 years among Biblical apologists, anyway?

And on and on it goes.

Does the Mendacity for Christ ever stop?

Labels & Constructs has it right - don't worship the messenger - learn, practice, and develop the message. That's the problem with all religions - they think it's all about the messenger. And then they make that messenger right and everybody else wrong. Eventually humanity will evolve into beings that learn to develop spiritually. We should take lessons from the likes of Rudolph Steiner (and Christ, Mohammed, Budda, and all the others who have expanded).

What will be written 50 years from now about WMD in Iraq? 2,000 years from now will folks be reading what Bush and Cheney said about Iraq or what someone else said? Even now they are starting to write that we really have to stay. Next they will be writing it really was the right thing to do.

If the events weren't recorded when they were supposed to have happened then they should be totally discounted. Was Julius Ceasar's assasination not recorded until 50 years after it happened? How long after Pompeii was it before it was written about? Claiming an 'oral tradition' then written down is silly.

How much of it is plain criminal activity for power and wealth??

JD,

It did not take the Catholic Church 300 years to come to the conclusion that Jesus of Nazareth was divine. The New Testament, composed entirely between AD 40 and AD 100, speaks constantly of Jesus in such terms. Here's a quote: "For in Him the whole fulness of deity dwells bodily," (Col 2:9). That one was written by St. Paul within 20 years of Jesus' death and resurrection. Clearly, the Church already believed in Jesus' divinity. The Council of Nicea, held in AD 325, established no new doctrines, but rather defended old doctrines against new dissent. The new dissent was called Arianism, and it wasn't 25 years old yet when the council was called to determine how to deal with it. Dan Brown's books might be entertaining, but they are bad sources of historical information.

You wrote that "death, resurrection, and ascension," isn't a proof of divinity, but rather "immortality without dying first." Interestingly enough, your objection isn't new or clever, but very old and worn. Passers-by taunted Jesus with it even as he hung dying: "And the people stood by, watching; but the rulers scoffed at him, saying, "He saved others; let him save himself, if he is the Christ of God, his Chosen One!" (Luke 23:35). The whole point of Christianity is that he wasn't trying to prove his divinity by dying and rising, he was SAVING US. That was his object - not some ego-trip.

It's a funny objection anyway. If death and resurrection are no proof of divinity, then I suggest you go ahead and give it a try under your own steam. You'd probably make it half-way, but I doubt you'd get as far with it as Jesus somehow managed.

You wrote, "If you die, you're human, end of story." That's precisely one of Christianity's other key beliefs. Jesus was not only God, but he was God-made-man. He was not God wearing a human suit, or God pretending to be human. He was a human. He was born, grew up, learned to tie his shoes, and so on. Otherwise, he'd have nothing in common with us, and no way to bridge the gap between God and man. But being both, he IS the bridge between infinite divinity and very-finite humanity.

"A short stay after resurrection and supposedly only appearing to your loyal supporters would have been way too easy to fake."

That's true. But then, have you ever staked your life on something you knew to be false? Can you even imagine somebody cooking up such a scheme? It makes no sense. "I'll cook up this story, presumably for some sort of gain on my part, and then I'll die rather than abandon it when people start calling me on my tall tale." Come on, JD. Eleven of the twelve apostles (all of them witnesses to the Resurrection) DIED rather than budge on their story. That speaks volumes at least about what they believed regarding their story. True or not, they certainly thought it was. And so did many of their peers, and many, many more since then.

"The most logical thing for any supreme being to do, and by definition logic would be the defining criteria for any entity capable of creating the universe, would be to inform the world's total populace simultaneously what his wishes were so that we could obey these wishes."

Um, He's tried that. Even in the aftermath of sin, we understand what right and wrong are. We all know that killing one's mother is an abomination. We know that stealing is wrong the moment it is done to us. These things are not mysterious, and they are not why Jesus came.

"Why is it Christians focus so much on the supposed supernatural acts in the bible and so little on the philosophy of Christ?... And then on top of all that, most of christianity's most ardent followers focus so much on these mysterious acts and don't even pay attention to the philosophy behind it all."

JD, the reason why Christians focus on Christ and his miracles and not his philosophy is because Christ wasn't a philosopher or an ethicist. He was God and the miracles are indications of it. In the personal dimension, many people suffer and seek an easy out (miracles, for instance, although modern skeptics also seek easy outs in the form of pills, fast food, etc.) because suffering is unpleasant and easy-outs are easier than the long-hard-road.

"If they did we truly would be, at the very least, a nation without war, hunger and poverty and free health care."

Only if it were a Christian nation. As secularists angrily point out about 6 times weekly on every major media outlet's headlines, it is not a Christian nation. I may be misunderstanding you, but you seem to be blaming Christians for failing to lead our country as Christians. When sincere Christians were a majority in our country, that may have been a fair criticism. Now it is not.

You know, your objection to the miraculous isn't scientific. It's silly. Science speaks to nature and can observe nothing else: nothing but the ordinary and repetitious, or at least repeatable. But the point of calling something supernatural is to say that it is beyond the scope of the ordinary, and isn't subject to the repetitive mechanical laws of the universe. Now, if there is no God, there is no strong reason to believe in, or even suppose the possibility of supernatural events. But if there is a God, as commonly understood, then there is no reason to doubt their possibility even if one doubts a specific miracle's reality. One of the chief perks of being God is being all-powerful, I'm given to understand.

Another perk of being God is being all-knowing. That is, knowing more than the likes of you or I. If you don't believe in a God, then drop the religion thing altogether and don't bother, since it's meant to be a way of relating with Him. But if you do believe in a God, humble yourself and realize that He doesn't have to prove Himself to you. You have to prove yourself to Him. He doesn't have to do things in a way that suits you. To the contrary.

Your question shows that you are mainly concerned with what "being a christian" is. It is possible to accept the possibility of resurrection without being "a christian". Other humans besides Christ have become self-realized; they have developed spiritual abilities just as Jesus did. We are all capable of that. Jesus didn't want to be worshipped, he wanted us to know the way to become enlightened. And enlightenment is a human possibility, not just a "christian" thing. Christians have mis-interpreted it - they worship Jesus instead of what Jesus' was presenting to us.

I could hardly believe the drivel put out by the Post in acknowledging, begrudgingly it appears, the celebration of Easter. I read the Sunday Post editorial on Easter and read it again, looking for a smidgen of understanding of the meaning of the death and resurection of Christ. The only thing I could I can guess is that it boils down to this, "Can't we all just get along."
To add insult to injury - for Christians who believe the story of Easter, that is - was John Spong, who declared:I do not believe that Jesus defied gravity to ascend into the heavens of a three-tiered universe to be reunited with the God who lives above the sky, but I do believe that Jesus opened the door to that realm in which life can become so whole and so fully human that....blah, blah, blah. And for the sage philosopher Melissa Etheridge,who testified of her belief in the Easter bunny...and good feelings...and blue skies. whatever.
The next time a Muslim holiday rolls around, I want to see the Post offer the same kind critical statements of non-belief directed at this religion.

RPC said:

"We either believe Jesus is equal with God, and rose from the dead, or that he was a madman. We cannot pick and choose to believe some of the things that he taught, and avoid other statements that he made. He did not leave room for that. Either we accept all of him, or none of him. "

You are absolutely correct. He said he was the Son of God, which leaves no room for diplomacy. He didn't allow much wiggle room as to how he should be regarded. People may try to use His teachings as the basis of their own philosophy, and thus make Him out to be a philosopher rather than the Messiah which He claimed He was. However, to do so is to cherry pick and not to understand the full message of Jesus Christ.

Now with regards to whether you have to believe in the literal bodily resurrection to be a Christian, I will say the following. A person can call himself Christian for whatever reason he wants to, but if he seeks the kind of salvation that Christ was preaching, he must ultimately (in this life or in the world of spirits) believe in the resurrection of Jesus Christ. Christ claimed to be THE way, the truth, and the life. Further, if there is no resurrection, Christianity falls flat on its face as a system of salvation.

Now, if a person wants to call himself Christian without believing in the literal bodily resurrection of Christ and all mankind, he is free to his opinions. However, he shouldn't be surprised if he ends up getting the label without the salvation.

Hi,
I loved the discussion, but I think it would have been better if you had included someone from the liberal or mainstream or moderate strain of Catholic or Protestant Christianity (the strain that--ironically--Sally and Jon come from).
The closest among those you included would be N.T. Wright, a solid and honest biblical scholar, but pretty conservative in his views. And perhaps Kathleen Flake, who is a first rate church historian, and who wrote a fine essay about how various Christian groups (especially Mormonism) define the meaning of "Christian." That's what she's good at, but still not a moderate-to-liberal/mainline-to-progressive voice.
This is not a big criticism, but just to say that you hurt the collection of essays by making your spectrum of opinion so narrow.

Best,
Stan Duncan

Hi,
I loved the discussion, but I think it would have been better if you had included someone from the liberal or mainstream or moderate strain of Catholic or Protestant Christianity (the strain that--ironically--Sally and Jon come from).
The closest among those you included would be N.T. Wright, a solid and honest biblical scholar, but pretty conservative in his views. And perhaps Kathleen Flake, who is a first rate church historian, and who wrote a fine essay about how various Christian groups (especially Mormonism) define the meaning of "Christian." That's what she's good at, but still not a moderate-to-liberal/mainline-to-progressive voice.
Not a big criticism, but just to say that you hurt the collection of essays by making your spectrum of opinion so narrow.

Best,
Stan Duncan

The literal Resurectionist,
blinded by the truth,
sees the road to salvation as a concrete pad,
They say no matter what you do,
if you believe then when the moment comes,
you will rocket to heaven with the bless-ed us,
oh, finally - the happy fun.

It's written in an ancient, holy book,
you admit it's a beautiful song,
Hundreds of people in the book say it's true,
You didn't say it was literally true,
you're wrong.

You're not one of us,
you're not one with the son.

Your middle road is a dirty and rocky path,
an anathema to the militant athiest,
it's mixed with monkeys, Mohammed, metaphors,
a difficult road at best,
it leads to hell with the rest,
thy will be done.

The Universe come to life cryed when it hears this said,
The truth is true,
do unto others,
as you would have them do to you.

Resurrection matters theologically for two reasons:

1) It proves there's life after death
2) It proves the existence of the Father (alone or as part of trinity). All miracles in the NT can be attributed to Jesus alone (even miracles he wasn't aware he was doing and attributed them to something external to him). But if he is dead then there is noone to raise him from the dead - therefore there is a God which is not "all Jesus".
This, however, can be easily refuted by saying that his own followers raised him from the dead (without being aware they did it), i.e. that there is nothing divine separate from men.

All this doesn't mean that it did actually happen, or that if it did happen he was raised bodily and not only in spirit.
I'm actually inclined to consider the NT account of the resurrection is true, but a simple physical resurrection (as Lazarus) is, to me, out of question - otherwise he would have stayed with them as a living proof of it.
The key to figuring this out, therefore, is getting to a better understanding of what the spirit is (assuming it is describable by one word, and even that is a very big assumption).

And yes, I do take a scientific approach to this, but it's not Dennett's or Dawkins's approach which is not scientific at all - to start with the presumption that some things can't and don't happen and fiddle with the data until they get to an explanation that fits their original assumption, or selectively label accounts as myth (rather than data). Of course it's very difficult to separate myth from reality, and reality from subjective or objective reality, but that's what reproduction and experimentation is all about, isn't it.

Here are the beliefs of the true Christian from the Holy Scriptures (NIV, KJV, NASB)
Belief in one God, eternally existing in three Persons, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.
Beleif that man was created in the image of God, that he sinned and thereby incurred physical and spiritual death; that human beings are sinners by nature and practice.
Belief that the Scriptures to be verbally inspired of God and inerrant, and that they are of supreme and final authority in faith and life.
Belief it is the duty and privilege of all believers to witness by deed and word to those truths set forth in the Holy Scriptures.
Belief in the bodily resurrection of the just and the unjust; the eternal life of the saved and the everlasting punishment of the lost.
Belief that Jesus Christ was pre-existent and eternal and in His incarnation was begotten by the Holy Spirit and born of the Virgin Mary. He is truly God and truly man.
Belief that the Lord Jesus Christ died for our sins according to the Scriptures as the substitutionary Sacrifice; that all who receive Him by faith are saved and justified on the ground of His shed blood.
Beleif in the physical resurrection of Jesus Christ and in His ascension into Heaven to be the High Priest and Advocate of the members of His Body, the Church.
Belief in the personal, imminent and visible return of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.
beleif that all believers are called to live their lives to God’s glory, connected with His family, growing to be like Christ, serving the Church, and reaching the lost.
Belief that there are two sacraments set forth in the Scriptures: Baptism and the Supper of our Lord (Communion).

Victoria, Victoria, Victoria,

Granted you are not Jewish but you are a member of the very flawed Islamic "faith". Your brainwashing in Islam is severe but there is a way out as you can simply follow the Five Easy Deprogramming Steps noted below:

Using "The 77 Branches of Islamic "faith" a collection compiled by Imam Bayhaqi as a starting point. In it, he explains the essential virtues that reflect true "faith" (iman) through related Qur’anic verses and Prophetic sayings." i.e. a nice summary of the Koran and Islamic beliefs.

"1. Belief in Allah"

"aka as God, Yahweh, Zeus, Jehovah, Mother Nature, etc." should be added to your cleansing neurons.

"2. To believe that everything other than Allah was non-existent. Thereafter, Allah Most High created these things and subsequently they came into existence."

Evolution and the Big Bang or the "Gib Gnab" (when the universe starts to recycle) are more plausible and the "akas" for Allah should be included if you continue to be a "creationist".

"3. To believe in the existence of angels."

A major item for neuron cleansing. Angels/devils are the mythical creations of ancient civilizations, e.g. Hittites, to explain/define natural events, contacts with their gods, big birds, sudden winds, protectors during the dark nights, etc. No "pretty/ugly wingy thingies" ever visited or talked to Mohammed, Jesus, Mary or Joseph or Joe Smith. Today we would classify angels as fairies and "tinker bells". Modern devils are classified as the demons of the demented.

"4. To believe that all the heavenly books that were sent to the different prophets are true. However, apart from the Quran, all other books are not valid anymore."

Another major item to delete. There are no books written in the spirit state of Heaven (if there is one) just as there are no angels/"pwtfft"s to write/publish/distribute them. The Koran, OT, NT etc. are simply books written by humans for humans.

Prophets were invented by ancient scribes typically to keep the uneducated masses in line. Today we call them fortune tellers.
Prophecies are also invalidated by the natural/God/Allah gifts of Free Will and Future.

"5. To believe that all the prophets are true. However, we are commanded to follow the Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him) alone."

Mohammed spent thirty days fasting in a hot cave before his first contact with Allah aka God etc. via a "pretty wingy thingy". Common sense demands a neuron deletion of #5. #5 is also the major source of Islamic violence i.e. turning Mohammed's "fast, hunger-driven" hallucinations into horrible reality for unbelievers.

Accept these five "cleansers" and we guarantee a complete recovery from your Islamic ways!!!!

farnaz-

im sorry for the suffering you've endured.

i really think you may have confused me with someone else- hence your elaborate observations-

im really not jewish- but it doesnt matter-
you posted a sentence that bothered me-

at first it was so anathema to my own life and experience i had to read it twice-

here is what you wrote to me-

"Among posts to another panel, someone pointed out that you are a Jew.S/he went on to say that when you rise up in defense of others in lieu of asserting and defending your own group/religious identity, you are quite understandably held in contempt by those you seek to "protect."

let me point out, it is quite possible , and ive done it with people of different races, sexual orientation, religion-...

to speak up for those who are very different from ourselves without surrendering or demeaning one's own individual identity-

it's not "in lieu of" instead of-or a tradeoff-
this tribal mentality of sticking together gainst the "others" is not part of the american socialization process as much as it is elsewhere-

actually, one has to be very secure and stable in their own identity- knowing it may be attacked-
even if those doing the oppressing are from one's own "group" to speak up in defense of those who position may be weakened, but from a different group.

because right is right- and it is wrong to gang up on people because they are different-

im not mexican, or have AIDS, im not homosexual, african-american,a prostitute,christian,homeless or a jewish person.

but ive stuck my neck out in crowds when ive seen injustice of one large group attacking a lone wolf- and ive even been arrested for it.

life has offered me many opportunities to do this, and i'll do it again.

and i have never, never had the experience- ever- not even one time-
of the person or other members of their "group" coming back at me with contempt. (quite the opposite)

since you agreed with, and made some conjecture based on that philosophy-

im assuming you believe this also-

sometimes it just takes one voice- people have galvanized around one voice- ive been that voice- ive seen it-

and sometimes people are to weak or beaten down to be "for themselves"

you ask-
"If I am not for myself, who will be for me?"

we all have stories, we all need help sometimes-

here is your answer brother-
maybe it will be me-

or maybe if i am not able to be for myself sometime- it would be you.

so, of course i will try to stick up for my sister jihadist-

she's my sister dude, what's wrong with that?

anti-semitism, xenophoba, homophobia,islamophobia- they're all pretty ugly-

do you think only people in those little categories speak against them?

peace bro- if you're in america now, i hope it's good to you.

Dear Tell Me More,

I have written and given testimony, along with thousands and thousands of others, not only from Iran, but from throughout the Middle East. I assure you there is nothing unique in what my family experienced.

I try very hard to keep those memories at bay, to live my life normally, and to some extent, I have succeeded. One wishes one could heal the world, but at this point in my life, I recognize the futility of that desire.

Jihadist asked a question, and much to my surprise, I found myself answering in more depth than I would have liked.

I look forward to a day when Jews and all other oppressed groups will not have to testify.

Shalom.

Farnaz

Dear Jihadist,

Just a last point about Iran. The Christian community was always very small, although ancient and important to Christians. As you probably know, extremists do not distinguish Christianity from the West, although they often do not say so outside of Iran and other Islamic countries.

The Bahai situation, now, is very different from that of the Christians and Jews. The Jewish population was larger than the Christian, but the Bahai have always been the largest. If I'm not mistaken, there are now nearly three million of them. Some have fled, of course, but they cannot all leave.

They are desperate, Jihadist, as we were, and as was the case with us, there is no one to help them.

Farnaz

Farnaz-

Thank you for sharing your personal story with the readers of the ON FAITH forum.

You have a very unique knowledge to share with the Western world. Please write and document your experiences. You should have no problem publishing.

Best wishes to you.

Shalom.

you're a very odd little duck farnaz-
take it down a peg brother-

were not in competition here- we're tryng to find some common grounds for communication-

i have no idea why you imagine i am a jewish person farnaz-

(that's a real first! and ive been on these boards a since their inception)

but you're wrong-

but does it matter to you, and why?

is it so important to be right?

personally, i prefer respect for others and kind manners- but you do your thing.

well, good luck to you on these boards-

you're new, you'll get used to people here
(but you're realy waay off on your analysis of me).
o well-

lets all just try to take the log out of our own eyes, before we go searching for the toothpcicks in eacn others, eh?

peace all and happy easter again to all our christian brothers and sisters out there

Only if you wish to call it a Christian doctrine;)

But you are right This will likely be the only time we agree about anything. But surprises do happen. I've found myself in agreement with Ms Jacoby on the three proceeding question and that's three more times than I truly expected to ever agree with her about anything.

Gary

Once again, you are Theologically correct.

My Jesuit friends believe in only one god, pater omnipotens, qui factorum cieli et terra.

The Mormons believe Joseph Smith is a God by now.

Again though, my major point was to agree with you for the first and, probably, last time:

If one does NOT believe in the Divinity of Jesus, one has no business calling oneself a Christian.

The Mormons, my erstwhile tribe, DO believe in the divinity of Jesus. They just believe that Henry James can become divine too. You got a problem with that????????

Entirely different Jesus though Mr. James. Remember that one of the major tenets of Mormonism is As we are God once was. As God is we can become. This would for all practical purposed that a virtually infite stream of God goes ever further back in time. Christianity believes that there has only eer been one God who has Chosen to present himself to us as one of three different personas though all are of the same substance or if you prefer manifestations of the same entity.

Oh there "Reality Challenged" and Obfuscating Jihadist,

What pray tell is complicated about the flaws and errors of Islam????????

Once again the first four flaws/errors of Islam:

1. Belief in "pretty/ugly wingie thingies".

2. Belief that an hallucinating, illiterate Arab did actually talk to the "pretty Gabriel" in the hot "Gabe" cave and therein received the warmongering and anti-female words and resultant laws now listed in the koran.

3. That Sunnis are superior to Shiites in all aspects of life. And Shiites think the same way about Sunnis.

4. That Islam is perfect and the koran inherently condones no sin even though the 24/7, 800 year-old blood feud between Sunnis and Shiites gives significant credence that greed, hate, suicides, assassinations, maiming, and murder are condoned by the koran. Having multiple wives also gives significant credence to the sins of rape, adultery, lust and polygamy. The condoned treatment of these wives gives credence that the koran allows the sins of hatred, anger and greed.

We await your commentary about these obvious flaws and what you are going to do about them.

Dear Jihadist,

No, I am no longer living in Iran. There are almost no Jews left there. The horror there for some of us was almost unspeakable.

No one is able to openly be who they are, including moderately observant Muslims and those of Muslim parentage who are nonbelievers. For women, the situation is beyond words. Some Iranians actually hoped that when the US invaded Iraq, it would next go to Iran. One couldn't reason with them. That is how bad it was and is.

To the best of my knowledge, most Christians have fled. The Bahai face institutionalized discrimination. Whatever paper may have protected them no longer does. They are restricted in what schools they can go to and in every other "right" granted Iranian Muslims.

My friends and my family's friends were Jews and Muslims, those of the latter group, who had not been completely brainwashed. The night we left, my mother took me to a Muslim friend's home and told her to look for us in the morning.

If we were not there, she was to take whatever she wanted. I remember that night. Farideh's home was very elegant. She and my mother were like sisters. They even looked alike, and they were both so lovely. My mother and Farideh drank tea, and wept.

I tried to memorize everything so that if I could ever return, it would not seem foreign to me. Iran has suffered so much, one cannot even describe it. From one thug, Shah, to the next, and the next....

Farnaz

Hello Farnaz,

Are you only recently reading On Faith?

The only other Iranian I know who posted before in On Faith is Mavaddad. He is a Bahai, a student, and living in the US.

So you are an Iranian and Jewish. Are you still living in Iran?

On paper, Zaorasters, Jews and Christians are recognised in Iran, but not the Bahais.

If you are still living in Iran, please share what is happening in Iran on Christians and Jews.

"J"

Dear Jihadist,

I am pleased to see you have done your homework about my name. Iran is a large country, hard for anyone anywhere to ignore. And please do not abuse those who post here by denying anti-Christian sentiment in Muslim nations, or I shall have to edify them, and they will be horrified.

You say my quotation is telling. It is absurdly easy to find. Please do find it and enlighten us. As for me, I most assuredly, am not Muslim as I have asserted frequently. That does not mean I have not read the Qu'ran in Arabic. You add three and two and come up with eight.

Your list of so-called experts is somewhat silly. The Quarayza Jews, Jihadist?

I am Jewish, Jihadist. Iranian and Jewish. What are you?

Farnaz

Stephen Johnston says: "You are a good man." "All men have purpose." "You have purpose."

Inspiring words, but anyone can say them – it doesn’t have to be a superhuman being saying them to be meaningful.

Billie Qualtrough say: “and its comfort [belief in the resurrection] allows me to cope with what would otherwise be the hopelessness of ever present mortality.”

I don’t believe in the resurrection any more and I’m not the least bit hopeless. The atheists I know are really enjoying life – knowing it’s the only one we will have – and we're not fearing a fiery eternal hell, because we don’t believe that an ancient myth is factual.

Billie – I wouldn’t be surprised to find out that you are not an “engineer and a scientist” as you claim to be, but instead are a fundamentalist Christian trying to impress people that someone with scientific training would make such statements of faith.

Speculating on my faith?

Too much time on your hands and nothing to talk about here?

Ahh... the suspicious and speculative minds! More telling about you than me.

There are non-Muslims in Muslim panelists' threads using Muslim sounding handles. Easy to spot them. One giveaway, "I am from an Islamic background".

Never come across a Muslim into sarcasm, satire and irony before? Or can't tell what are those?

Did I mess up all your lazy assumptions, easy notions and pigeon-holings of Muslims?

Or are some are really hoping I am not a Muslim? To cease to being a Muslim?

Sorry to dissapoint anyone's hopes and dreams for me - to be an atheist or to be an adherent of another faith. I am a Muslim. So there. Live with it.

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

Hello Farnaz,

From Ahmed of Bahrain to Victoria now?

You : "If I am not for myself, who will be for me?"

Is is a very telling admission.

Happy Easter to you anyway. Even if you don't celebrate it. Nothing wrong with Christians celebrating their religious occasions, no? If you are a Muslim, I'd be surprised if you object to Christians celebrating Good Friday/Easter or Christmas. If not a Muslim, well.....

Somehow, I doubt you are a woman even with a name like Farnaz, which is more common in Iran, the Indian sub-continent than elsewhere. I had thought Norrie Hoyt was a woman before. But who can say. There are names that are used by both gender everywhere.

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

Concerned the Christian Now Liberated a.k.a. Crossanized Catholic Christian of Reality,

Hello pussycat. I see that you don't accept Resurrection as being literally, and still regard yourself as a Christian, a Christian of Reality.

You do know that theology is not a hot and sexy pursuit in the Muslim world. It is called, "kalam" from "talk".

Darn, my Muslim of Reality is different. It is functional and pragmatic. Not theo-talking. Killing you that I'm in Islamic banking and financial services?

Why waste time on the theology of nature of God instead of focussing on what God reminds us to do for our fellow men for peace? To strive for justice and justness in everything we do at the state and personal level for individual and collective peace?

Don't call the Originator, the Starter, the Creator of the Universe and all ensuing life the Singularity. We all know that God is Singular, but Singularity do smack of what scientists call that thing that started the Big Bang.

Does pursuing reason in faith and pursuit of science, and acceptance of science means co-opting scientific terms to replace religious ones to lend some, er, factual, scientific credence?

Faith and belief is personal and elemental and instinctive and spiritual. Either you have it or you don't.

Why make it complicated? :)

Dear Observer12,

I confess I have strong doubts that Jihadist is Muslim, but one never knows. Given the substance of her comments, her circumstances, my best bet is Christian. Hindu, Buddhist, etc., are doubtful, and she certainly cannot be Jewish, not if she resides where she says she does. Bahai is possible, I suppose.

Adding fuel to the fire of questions is J's list of experts, but it seems to be intended polemically.

In fairness to J, she did write:

"And yes, I am giving nothing away to you or anyone on my faith"

Farnaz

Dear Farnaz,

I have the uncanny suspicion that Jihadist is not Muslim, more intensely since the last exchange between you. Who knows? Maybe, J is busy painting eggs or otherwise observing, even as I write.

Any thoughts?

Observer12

Victoria:

I doubt very much that you have the slightest idea of what my correspondance with Jihadist concerns. At least, your post shows no sign of comprehension. My guess, from having followed J, is that she does.

As for you, I did not seek your advice, but since you proffer it, I shall offer you some of my own. Among posts to another panel, someone pointed out that you are a Jew. S/he went on to say that when you rise up in defense of others in lieu of asserting and defending your own group/religious identity, you are quite understandably held in contempt by those you seek to "protect."

If I am not for myself, who will be for me?

In the current case, you quite misunderstand the context, although, J, who does not carry the same baggage as you do, probably does.

The sad thing to me is that your identity has become so hollowed, so emptied, so deformed, that you are unable to assert it, that all you can do is "defend" those who neither need nor welcome your defense. Sadly, you are not alone among your brothers and sisters.

You have been injured, Victoria. The cause is history. The healing must start within you.

Farnaz

ZBOB -

I have the Bohm book and it's curious that the implications in his work as the path to a new quantum paradigm have been either ignored or overlooked by many other physicists.

On the other hand, recent works by Ervin Laszlo e.g. 'Science and the Akashic Field' & 'Science and the Reenchantment of the Cosmos' have clearly picked up where Bohm left off - but in a more popularized and less rigorously scientific format. Non-physicist Laszlo makes his case pretty persuasively and quotes other physicists liberally throughout the books.

Other consciousness researchers that have physics credentials do recognize Bohm's work, but rather than employing the 'hidden variables' that Bohm relies on as causal factors behind the emergence of the explicate/manifest order, Amit Goswami in 'The Self-Aware Universe' & Fred Alan Wolf in 'Parallel Universes' et al, pin the emergence of the phenomenal order on consciousness itself. Goswami clearly stands by consciousness as an alternative to Bohm's 'hidden variables' and makes his case in the book above (which you have very probably read).

For others that may not be as familiar with the materials, this all goes to the 'observer effect' as stated in quantum mechanics, where observation causes quantum probabilities to collapes into the 'solid' material world that we witness - the books above address this issue in different ways and also make note of the possiblity that there may be an infinite number of parallel 'probable' worlds co-existing, and possibly interacting moment by moment to create our own little universe.

Quantum changes occuring at hyper-speeds (from nanoseconds to attoseconds) go unnoticed in our slo-motion world. Each universe is as real or as unreal as all of the others, at least according to some of these views.

As you mentioned, numerous spiritual masters have had deep intuitive insights into what appears to be these very same quantum realities - some as far back as thousands of years ago.

Zen masters were fond of saying the same thing about their insights into this Reality in 100 different ways - to wit: Since there is only the One Substance, nothing more can be said about it -there is no inside and no outside to Reality and there are no separate, self-existing entities. All sentient life has the Buddha nature and are of one Suchness. Buddhas and humans do not mutually perceive one another. There is only the One Mind, eternal and self-existing.

It begins to sound a lot like physicist Bohm's vision of 'Wholeness and the Implicate Order'.

Gary

I am so pleased to be able to agree with you.

I can not see how anyone who does not believe that Jesus was divine, the Son of God, can call themselves a Christian.

A Unitarian maybe.

My ex-faith, the Mormons, certainly qualify as Christians as they most emphatically DO believe Jesus was divine.

If one refuses to accept the most basic tenet of a given faith then claiming to be a member of that faith is rather silly.

If one does not believe that Mohammed is the penultimate Prophet why would one claim to be a Muslim. If one did not believe self perfection a realistic goal why be a Hindu or a Buddhist?

Likewise if one is unwilling to accept the bodily resurrection of Jesus why would you claim to be a Christian.

Oh there "Reality Challenged" and Obfuscating Jihadist,

Still distracting, still "obfusing", still claiming some interest in "reforming" and cleansing Islam but still failing what is required for this i.e. the elimination of the flaws and errors of Islam. And once again, as a reminder, the first four flaws/errors of Islam:

1. Belief in "pretty/ugly wingie thingies".

2. Belief that an hallucinating, illiterate Arab did actually talk to the "pretty Gabriel" in the hot "Gabe" cave and therein received the warmongering and anti-female words and resultant laws now listed in the koran.

3. That Sunnis are superior to Shiites in all aspects of life. And Shiites think the same way about Sunnis.

4. That Islam is perfect and the koran inherently condones no sin even though the 24/7, 800 year-old blood feud between Sunnis and Shiites gives significant credence that greed, hate, suicides, assassinations, maiming, and murder are condoned by the koran. Having multiple wives also gives significant credence to the sins of rape, adultery, lust and polygamy. The condoned treatment of these wives gives credence that the koran allows the sins of hatred, anger and greed.

With respect to my own beliefs, again I am a Christian of the New Reality, a reality free of the myths of resurrections, apparitions, ascensions, immaculate conceptions, and "miracles". (The New Reality is being taught in many Catholic graduate school theology classes).

farnaz- if you feel you are being imposed upon by other people's ideologies-

don't come onto a forum which explores dialogue between people who hold different ideologies.

it is easter dude- and the question is one that is pertinent to christians on their holiday.

have some respect for the people who want to express their views on thw question posted-

dragging muslims and jewish people into the conversation about christianity only solidifies my suspicion that you have a personal,ill-intentioned agenda.

jihadist- this guy obviously has issues and is ready to pounce-

i recommend leaving him to his own misery.

Jihadist:

I am aware of the person to whom you were writing, as well as with your posts on this blog. Hence, my question about the Quarayza Jews. I am "dying" to hear you on the extermination. As for Ahmed, I speak for myself.

You write:

"[T}here are more people who prefer to "clean up", "cleanse", "reform" Islam than they would on their own faiths and beliefs."

My suggestion is that you follow your own advice as, I believe, I make clear in the last line of my previous post. I have no desire to reform any religion. My only request is that others not impose their ideologies (there is no such thing as theology) on me.

Finally, this may come as a shock to you, but there are Muslim nations outside of your own. You are uncertain of whether I am a man or a woman. . . .Interesting.

Farnaz

The Resurrection of Jesus is one of the most important tenets of Christianity.

All this talk of there being a twin brother or even triplets (Herod maybe killed one who couldn't be carried to Egypt with the other two) is only corrosive to the faith. People have known of identical twins and identical triplets for thousands of years. They didn't kill Jesus and replace him with a look-a-like, because no look-a-like would have had the crucifixion wounds that Christ showed to Doubting Thomas.

To those who say:
"I follow the message of Jesus, message of love etc..."

My question is, how can you follow his message of love, when that message is only a fraction of his total message? Jesus said that he is the Mesiah, the Son of God, he said tha he existed before the world began, he said that he has authority to forgive sins, he said that no one can come to the Father except through Him, etc.

Those words are of a lunatic, unless he truly is the Son of God.

You wouldn't believe much of anyone who said those sort of things that Jesus said regardless how much love they preached.

The essence of the New Testament is to proclaim the deity of Jesus. Jesus himself said it, and the letters written by Paul, Peter and John also said it.

Someone said that it took the Catholic Church 300 years to say that Christ was a deity. That statement is partially true. You need to consider the writings of the new testament, it clearly says that Jesus is the Son of God, and recent evidence date most of the books of the new testament to less than 100yrs after Christ's crucifixion. The earliest, which is believed to be the gospel according to St. Mark was written less than 20yrs after the crucifixion, by most estimates.

Those who said that the "Christian litearture" is biased are correct. The Christian literature is as bisased as the non-Christian literature. Anytime you have human beings trying to make a point there is inherent biases attached to it.

RPC

Dear Farnaz,

You : "I have no problem with Ahmed's posting. To you, my friend, I suggest careful examination of your own house."

My dear fellow or lady. It was Concerned the Christian Now Liberated who has a problem with Ahmed's posting. And one gave him a sermon on the resurrection.

I addressed the post to Concerned the Christian Now Liberated. He can speak for himself as always and as ever. But if you must....like Gerry and Jimbo before to "speak" for him on my posts directed to him...go ahead.

Ah, yes, have read and used to all sorts of "experts" on Islam and Muslims from Bernard Lewis to Samuel Huntington to Robert Spenser to Salman Rushdie, Ayaan Hirsi Ali, Ibn Warraq and here in On Faith threads, Deb Chatterjee, Arif, Ibrahmim Mahfouz etc.

So go ahead. I am dying to read what you know on Islam and Muslims.

...and what do you think of the resurrection of Jesus Christ? What does it mean for you? But you can go on about Islam and Muslims here. I am sure most would rather talk about it than on the resurrection.

I guarantee you the response will be more as there are more people who prefer to "clean up", "cleanse", "reform" Islam than they would on their own faiths and beliefs.

"J"

It has never been important to me. I believe there was a change in how religion exists in people because of Jesus. I believe the policy of forgiveness, brotherly love and steadfast personal determination to remain on that path is an act of faith that is not limited to Christians. I do not consider God to be the personal property of one faith, but the essence of life that all people experience regardless of their preferred rituals. When people choose to care, to have hope for the world and to find worth in those who have wrong them, they are practicing my religion. God does not punish or exclude people who weren't born in my home town. So, I think it the historical changes that were brought by Christianity that I find interesting. My eternal life and anyone's else's hinge on, "Why would you want to live in a constant battle forever?', because this is life.

My faith has always been about having a relation with the spirit of life and I believe that spirit is conceived in prosperity and goodness. I believe that all people are a part of that spirit. Although I consider myself a Christian because that is the way I was raised, I am more influenced by the rural beauty of nature.

Dear Entertained in New York,

Watched movie, which was truly wonderful and am off to bed.

Thank you!

Jihadist:

You know, unlike yours truly, many, perhaps, the larger number of nonMuslims who post here have not read the Qu'ran in any language, let alone Arabic.

Given all the protestations of Islam's peacefulness its acceptance of all faiths, blah, blah, and blah, perhaps you would care to enlighten us on the Qurayza Jews, following which I shall provide further illumination on your sacred text.

And this goes to. . . .? Oh, lots of things. The Middle East, what the Qu'ran says about Jesus and Christianity,Hinduism, Judaism, etc.

Islam took a great deal from both Judaism and Christianity. The latter were influenced by the Sufis. Sufi scholars here have a lot to say about the Qurayza Jews, none of which you will find flattering.

If anyone reading here does attempt to read the Qu'ran in English, be assured there are several noteworthy changes from the Arabic, which I shall be delighted to explain.

I have no problem with Ahmed's posting. To you, my friend, I suggest careful examination of your own house.

Farnaz

Since I don't view the word "Christian" as a label or a unique group of people, then my instinctive answer to this particular question comes from how I view others or their writings--whether they exude light or exude darkness or contention. In other words, how they treat others encapsulates whether in my own mind they are mostly "Christ-like" in their behavior, or how they write encapsulates whether they give off "light". Thus, a nominal non-Christian can in my own perspective be "seen" or read as what I consider a Christian, meaning a light-giver or light-bringer or light-bearer.

For example, Terra Gazelle whose writings I have deeply enjoyed gives what I consider light and much truth in her writing, generally. I learned much from her comment in Susan Jacoby's latest post about her view of the New Orleans tragedy, and I also loved a much earlier comment about gathering the string of pearls of truth from around the world. What an insight! Susan Jacoby wrote an insightful essay about the poignancy of personal handwritten letters--an essay full of light. Others have brought me many other insights or told of their contribution to making a better and more peaceful world. But I wouldn't tell them they are "Christ-like" at heart, because I understand that would be deeply disrespectful. I'll call them "light-bearers" and leave it at that.

I apologize to any I have offended on this website. May each of you have the peace you desire and cherish it.

Why is it Christians focus so much on the supposed supernatural acts in the bible and so little on the philosophy of Christ? It took the Catholic church 300 years before they actually came to the conclusion that Christ was divine. Proof of divinity would not have been death, resurrection and ascension, but immortality without dying first. If you die, you're human, end of story. A short stay after resurrection and supposedly only appearing to your loyal supporters would have been way too easy to fake. Of course, the story goes that Christ came down here to die for our sins which makes absolutely no sense at all. It's just an excuse to explain away the fact that "God" could actually be killed. The most logical thing for any supreme being to do, and by definition logic would be the defining criteria for any entity capable of creating the universe, would be to inform the world's total populace simultaneously what his wishes were so that we could obey these wishes. Imparting that information solely to a tribe of wandering bedouins 4000 years ago seems such an inefficient way to get the word out. And then supposedly getting a virgin magically pregnant 2000 years later with your personal messenger to revise the message imparted to the first group of people, well.... What I think God really needs is a professional publicist to do the job right. If this is an example of how he works then no wonder George Bush is his friend, they have a lot in common. And then on top of all that, most of christianity's most ardent followers focus so much on these mysterious acts and don't even pay attention to the philosophy behind it all. Can any of these so called christians recite the beatitudes or the corporal acts of mercy? And if they can, do they follow these rules that Christ himself spoke of? If they did we truly would be, at the very least, a nation without war, hunger and poverty and free health care. Until that day comes we are not a christian nation, and I think it's safe to say, we will never be one.

Concerned the Christian Now Liberated,

So brave! Taking on Ahmed from Bahrain. So desperate even to the point of taking on Muslim peaceniks?

Why not answer the question if you are still a Christian in spite of not believing in the resurrection?

Is that blasphemous and heretical by mainstream Christian beliefs?

Or is that what the Jesus Seminarians are saying?

Come now! St Thomas Aquinas is really influenced by Imam Al Ghazali on the nature of God. Imam Al Ghazali also influenced Moses Maimonides.

Do read Deepak Chopra's essay on this. He conflated resurrection with Hindu philosophical thoughts on reincarnation. And he talks about the Kingdom of God being in us. Not very original as the Gospel of Thomas doth say so.

Take is easy pussycat. Afer all, you have been resurrected and reincarnated as a Crossanized Christian and Catholic of Reality.

And yes, I am giving nothing away to you or anyone on my faith:)

Ex-Christian wrote:

"On another note, after a long hard week of working, why must we be besieged by christian stuff on television?"

Don't know, but besieged we are.
DVDs, reading, listening to your own stock of music are all good ideas.

Also, I don't know where you live, Ex, but here in New York PBS is showing a movie starting soon that seems to be untainted.

ZBOB:
If past, present, and future are all comingled as one then there must be some capacity somewhere to know past, present, and future all.

Maybe it is best to just keep it simple. But in the meantime, humans need some system to maintain an organized society for the benefit of all during our lifetime on earth.

It almost seems that humans tend to think that other humans wouldn't use religion to gain power and money for themselves! But one thing is for sure, humans want rules for others to live by and general quidelines available for themselves!!

Never mind the resurection, the 75% of people calling themselves "christians" today, who in actuality are members of today's current crop of tares,cannot even accept the virgin birth.

Ex-Christian wrote:

"On another note, after a long hard week of working, why must we be besieged by christian stuff on television?"

During times like these, the best thing to do if you don't have cable is to stock up on DVDs or catch up on reading.

Good luck!

Not so Hopeful in Vermont:

As you probably know, Christians would rather avoid the hard questions, meaning where their beliefs have historically led them. Even non-Christians are filled with Christian ideology since it pollutes the American and European environments. The Christians would rather talk about was he or wasn't he resurrected.

No one will address Still Hopeful for Humankind because they would have to question. Christianity teaches you not to question. I have been trying to purge myself of my christian heritage since the day of my birth, but I still haven't gotten rid of all of it.

On another note, after a long hard week of working, why must we be besieged by christian stuff on television?

Ahmed-

"Who through the Spirit of Holiness was declared with Power to be the Son of God by his resurrection from the dead: Jesus Christ our Lord. (Romans 1:4)

Can you live a perfect life or must you somehow hope that God will find mercy to forgive you. What if He came to you in Power and revealed Himself to you in dreams and visions and said- I am the Way, the Truth, and the Life. My death on the Cross was to make a way for you- to atone for your sins- simply through your faith and belief in Me. Then you are free to receive the Holy Spirit (His presence dwelling in you) and enter into a relationship with Him based on Love not Law. It is now Love that inspires you to be holy- not fear of the Law..

Blessing to you- this Holy Season.

"But whatever was to my profit I now consider loss for the sake of Christ. What is more, I consider everything a loss compared to the surpassing greatness of knowing Christ Jesus my LORD, for whose sake I have lost all things. I consider them rubbish, that I may gain Christ and be found in Him, not having a righteousness of my own that comes from the law, but that which is through faith in Christ—the righteousness that comes from God and is by faith. I want to know Christ and the Power of His resurrection and the fellowship of sharing in His sufferings, becoming like Him in His death, and so, somehow, to attain to the resurrection from the dead."

Ahmed from Bahrain,

You noted: "What does it matter even if he did?? What matters if how we treat our fellow man and our environment. That was his message. "

Hmmm, considering the constant hate of Sunni for Shiite and vice versa, I recommend cleaning up Islam before commenting on the treatment of our fellow men and women.

ZBOB:

Many cultures have Genesis stories and it all comes down to one thing - separateness from the spiritual world.
For instance, the Australian aborigines talk about people been asleep in "dreamstate", but waking up because the animal spirits were shouting; the snake was shouting the loudest.
Therefore, the difference between animals and humans is that animals exist mostly in dreamstate and view the world as symbolic and semantic interactions, while humans view it from a materialist/physical point of view.

Things happen in the universe. Some things happen simultaneously. The brain forms gestalts made of connected ideas and concepts that reflect the observed events and how they connect. This is how the mind works.
The human mind, however, knows which gestalts are false and which are true, unlike the animal mind.

In other words, the human mind has a semipermeable boundary, a censor, which determines which gestalts reach one's awareness- the rest stay in the unconscious mind.
This censor determines one's world view, as it is essentially "the" waking awareness, and this censor, historically, is very materialist oriented. The censor selects only gestalts that enable manipulation of the physical world ("tug A to get B")- that's how mankind built itself a civilization.

People, obviously, can have different world views, and people who have "false" censors are prone to superstition (seeing false casual connections between events) - breaking a mirror doesn't necessarily get you bad luck, i.e. there is no causality in this gestalt.

There is, however, one gestalt that stays consistently in the unconscious mind, but is actually true. These are the interconnected events that are of human making - the spirit, or the collective unconscious, if you like.
By "true", I mean that there is causality between such events, but I'd be hard pressed to say how one can "tug" those consistently.
I suspect that one can't, because other people are already connected to and through it - you can't tug people (even though most people are not aware of their spiritual sides and their interconnectedness)

So far I've accumulated numerous examples of the spirit at work, but haven't been able to put it in a coherent theory (and postulate a meaningful physical side of the spirit - why and how it connects to actual neurons) .

One thing, that I have been able to determine so far is that my computer screen acts as a mirror of my own spirit (-ual state):

-one day I posted on the net my persona/soul image (as self-constructed - I made it up). It had a black sun and a neanderthal looking man.
A few days latter I saw was those two elements on the next cover of the New Scientist magazine - "What put the bang in the bang"(a black sun) - "the neanderthal inside us all", read the cover.
(there are numerous other examples of that, but this one is the first that I noticed)

-I posted a joke somewhere and saw the same pun and punch line on my favourite tv show the next day.
(this discounted a subconscious "memetic" explanation as it couldn't have propagated that fast - besides, the script must have been written before I posted the joke)

-I got preoccupied with analyzing the symbols in Pirates of the Caribbean (it has thorough Christian symbology, BTW). A months or so latter I was invited to a trip to Istanbul, we stayed at the "Armada" hotel, there was a conference on prosthetics at the same time (and people without limbs), and sparrows (as in Jack) ate my breakfast; I had left it at the terrace and went back in to get juice.
(so it's not just the computer screen - it's all you see, and animals are part of the spirit as well)

I also experimented with trying to "see" things, for personal benefit :). I tried to "see" myself a new job on an internet board, so I pictured myself (professionally) and opened the page. And yes, it was there - an advertisement of my old job position posted the very same day by my former workplace (D'OH!:)

Anyway, by the end of all that I have to say I was getting very solipsistsic, and the world quickly reminded me that I'm not the only one who has a spiritual side to himself (wasn't a pleasant experience at all).

So, my inconclusive theory so far is that one's projected state of spirit determines one's world, but only to a point that the world would tolerate.
Projection, in that sense, is oneness with the world.. but I didn't really see other people as free-willed and free-spirited, which was my mistake.

I am also inclined to believe that one can not really remain in Nirvana, which it seems to me is the abolishment of the censor, the boundary between the inner consciousness and the inner unconscious (which is where the spiritual world is).
Because then one wouldn't really be able to function in the world as it is today - materialist, not to mention all the false gestalts - but maybe if everyone is in nirvana they would be true gestalts?
I speculate that my own boundary is actually transparent - i.e. I am my own censor and that I see all gestalts clearly, but don't really believe them all. That in itself is a meaningful compromise, but is dangerous as it has led me in the past to identify with my own dark side, that I have seen inwardly through the boundary (and if the light side looks at the dark side, then the light side has no awareness of itself and thinks the dark side is itself)

Anyway, I'll write a book if I figure it all out but I guess it won't be anytime soon.
Right now what really interests me is whether or not the inorganic world (matter) is part of the spirit (in a verifiable way).

RPC wrote:
The proof of Christianity is in the resurection of Christ. Without the resurrection, Jesus' message is plain nonsense.

There is more than one message, as Still Hopeful for Humakind points out. Which of them are you referring to? Are there any you would like to discount?

Ahmed from Bahrain wrote:
What matters if how we treat our fellow man and our environment. That was his message.

How, in these post NT millennia, have we treated them?

RPC wrote:
The proof of Christianity is in the resurection of Christ. Without the resurrection, Jesus' message is plain nonsense.

There is more than one message, as Still Hopeful for Humakind points out. Which of them are you referring to? Are there any you would like to discount?

Ahmed from Bahrain wrote:
What matters if how we treat our fellow man and our environment. That was his message.

How, in these post NT millennia, have we treated them?

AHMED,
It matters. For if he rose from the dead, his identity is validated as the Son of God. Therefore, he would have authority to forgive sins and grant eternal life to those who believe he is who he said he is.

Yes, we ought to live a righteous life, pursuing peace, justice, and equality among men. Yes, we need to take care of the earth we live in, and help others. But his message encompassed more than the life for the "here and now". His message also has "eternal" consequences. He said he came to give eternal life to those who believe in him. And that's a powerful statement to discard.

You Mean some people Actually Take the Resurrection Story Literally?????

That is sillier than taking one of my novels literally.

What does it matter even if he did?? What matters if how we treat our fellow man and our environment. That was his message. People get bogged down with dogma and irrelevant details and forget about the message.

If you don't believe Jesus rose from the dead, then why follow him? Jesus said he is the Son of God, he claimed to exist before the world began, he claimed that he is one with God, he said that no one comes to the Father except through him, he said that he is the light, the way, and the truth, etc. He even claimed to forgive people's sin, and that outraged the religious leadership at the time.

Thus, what would you believe, if someone knocks on your door and tells you that he is God, and that he existed before the world began? What would you believe if that person tells you that all of your sin are forgiven? On what authority? What if this person tells you that you cannot come to God unless you believe in him?You would probably think he is a madman, that he is insane...unless he proves to you that what he said is true.

We either believe Jesus is equal with God, and rose from the dead, or that he was a madman. We cannot pick and choose to believe some of the things that he taught, and avoid other statements that he made. He did not leave room for that. Either we accept all of him, or none of him.

Think about it. If we don't believe Jesus is the Son of God, and, thus, he did not rise from the dead, then why follow him at all? You wouldn't follow a madman, would you?

On the other hand, if we believe that he rose from the dead, then we can believe that he is the Son of God. Therefore, we can accept the totality of his message; he is the way, the light, and the truth, and no one comes to the Father except through him, just like he said.

The proof of Christianity is in the resurection of Christ. Without the resurrection, Jesus' message is plain nonsense. With the resurrection, his message is life saving.

Stan:
I completely agree with you that it would be presumptuous of us to assume that we will ever completely understand every aspect of the universe. However, our attempts at theorising the nature of physics, biology, etc.allows us to "create" the knowlege of the universe for the universe. As a famous physicist once said: we are stars learning what stars are.

And while I do not think that neo-Darwinistic theories completely explain the evolution of the material aspect of biology, the current theories are intriguing but lacking. As a proponent of the theories of theoretical physicist David Bohm, I believe that the purely materialistic viewpoint of the neo-Darwinists overlooks the depth of reality that not only includes the explicate order but also the implicate order of reality. Bohm's book "Wholeness and the Implicate Order" is highly recommended.
(I do think that integration of various scientific disciplines is necessary for further development)

Not only did he resurrect then, but, if the Sacred Mystery of the Holy Roman Catholic Church-- a prophecy set aside by Vatican II, he's back as of June 1, 2002. As with the last incarnation, he is a gracious man, unlike so many who claim to esteem hime.

Every religion has its silliness, but I suppose the nonsense of Christianity--the resurrection, the cannibalism of the eucharist, the worship of a corpse on a stick, walking on water (although water skiing would have been okay), a virgin birth, etc.--does take it all rather far.

The larger problems go to Christianity's immorality. The notion that you may live as you wish so long as you accept jesus in the end. The notion that the sinner is more important than the sinned against, a convenient way to avoid justice, not vengeance, but justice, justice which leads to human progress. The notion that if do not accept the divinity of christ, you will be damned forever. Read: "My way or the highway."

Armed with these deporable notions, the Christians have imposed the imperialist revelations of their ideology on the rest of us--Animists, Buddhists, Hindus, Jews, Muslims, et al--infusing their hateful doctrines into various nation states including this one, whose president called for the rebirth of jesus christ in the Republican party, and whose faithful rose (?) to the call.

Should one point out any of the foregoing to the Christians, he will inevitably be met with one of two tautologies:

Tautology no. 1: Anyone who did/said thus and so is not a "true christian." Yet, they have been doing/saying thus and so for two thousand years, so, where, then, is the "true christian"?

Tautology no. 2: "Christianity is the religion of love."

Love of violence, love of death, love of torture, love of exploitation,love of child molestation, love of genocide, etc. Religion of love used to be a convenient alibi, how or why, I cannot fathom.

There was one good idea that had a christian source: separation of church and state,at first, a disjoining necessary to protect freedom of christian worship, now used to to protect all and no religious observance.

A parting note: In the interest of giving lip service to that notion of the early christian settlers/occupiers/genociders, should this blog not avoid questions such as this about jesus, who figures in the religious practices of one or two groups, but in others, not at all?

Every religion has its silliness, but I suppose the nonsense of Christianity--the resurrection, the cannibalism of the eucharist, the worship of a corpse on a stick, walking on water (although water skiing would have been okay), a virgin birth, etc.--does take it all rather far.

The larger problems go to Christianity's immorality. The notion that you may live as you wish so long as you accept jesus in the end. The notion that the sinner is more important than the sinned against, a convenient way to avoid justice, not vengeance, but justice, justice which leads to human progress. The notion that if do not accept the divinity of christ, you will be damned forever. Read: "My way or the highway."

Armed with these deporable notions, the Christians have imposed the imperialist revelations of their ideology on the rest of us--Animists, Buddhists, Hindus, Jews, Muslims, et al--infusing their hateful doctrines into various nation states including this one, whose president called for the rebirth of jesus christ in the Republican party, and whose faithful rose (?) to the call.

Should one point out any of the foregoing to the Christians, he will inevitably be met with one of two tautologies:

Tautology no. 1: Anyone who did/said thus and so is not a "true christian." Yet, they have been doing/saying thus and so for two thousand years, so, where, then, is the "true christian"?

Tautology no. 2: "Christianity is the religion of love."

Love of violence, love of death, love of torture, love of exploitation,love of child molestation, love of genocide, etc. Religion of love used to be a convenient alibi, how or why, I cannot fathom.

There was one good idea that had a christian source: separation of church and state,at first, a disjoining necessary to protect freedom of christian worship, now used to to protect all and no religious observance.

A parting note: In the interest of giving lip service to that notion of the early christian settlers/occupiers/genociders, should this blog not avoid questions such as this about jesus, who figures in the religious practices of one or two groups, but in others, not at all?

The answer used to be YES, you had to believe in the literal bodily resurrection of Jesus in order to be a Christian -- the Nicene Creed, the Anglican Church's "articles of faith," the Catholic catechism, etc.

Nowadays, of course, our allegedly more "sophisticated" self-described Christians can take refuge in highly nuanced, symbolic, metaphorical territory.

I've read the New Testament, a fair amount of extra-biblical apologetics, and a huge volume of secular history (such as it is) and textual criticism, and so of course, I remain an atheist and I don't believe in the resurrection, or even in the historicity of the composite character of Jesus as he appears in the Canonical Gospels.

ZBOB:

Your writings are way beyond my capacity to visualize. However, since you seem to presume "evolution of species by natural selection" I tend to discount severely the rest of your writings.

The 'they' out there only wants the two concepts, i.e., creation in six days as stated in the Bible or 'evolution of species by natural selection' which is opposed to the Bible. Another alternative/variation of 'intelligent design', should be 'design evolution of species' by a higher Force of some type. But this concept rules out the God as systemized in the Old Testament and is therefore not allowed to be discussed at any length.

'Design Evolution' of things/beings/etc. by some Force just doesn't allow for the concept of God that has been engrained into humanity by the concept in the Bible and other religious writings and that is in the interest of established human order and organizations to maintain. Obsolescence of species/designs by newer species/designs doesn't seem to be an acceptable concept for discussion.

So it would seem that whatever concept is put forth it should start with an understanding that something is still out there and in control, and could and can intervene whenever and however it might desire to do so. Intellectually, it would seem that 'creation in six days' even though it clearly didn't happen that way is superior to the concept of things unintelligently selecting a trait or characteristic that forms or becomes a higher order 'species'. Experimentation and design changes would seem more clearly to be what has occured and what is probably still occurring. Our time in all of time is clearly a minute point. Clearly the universe has order as opposed to chaos and clearly that order has been maintained for what would seem to us to be an awfully long time. Isn't it presumptious of us to assume we can understand it all???

Even as an engineer and a scientist, it is not hard for me to believe in the literal resurrection of Jesus Christ. The proof can't be found in archeological digs, can't be proven by the scriptures (no living eye witnesses in my neighborhood), is not supported by logic or science (yet), but still I know it is true. The knowledge has been placed in my heart by a loving God, and its comfort allows me to cope with what would otherwise be the hopelessness of ever present mortality. Every man must decide what they believe for themselves. I believe that the first 4 gospels of the New Testament are not significantly metaphorical. I believe they are true.

Even as an engineer and a scientist, it is not hard for me to believe in the literal resurrection of Jesus Christ. The proof can't be found in archeological digs, can't be proven by the scriptures (no living eye witnesses in my neighborhood), is not supported by logic or science (yet), but still I know it is true. The knowledge has been placed in my heart by a loving God, and its comfort allows me to cope with what would otherwise be the hopelessness of ever present mortality. Every man must decide what they believe for themselves. I believe that the first 4 gospels of the New Testament are not significantly metaphorical. I believe they are true.

SUSAN JACOBY, WHERE ARE YOU WHEN YOU ARE SO DESPERATELY NEEDED?

The resurrection of Jesus Christ should not be the central theme for Christianity since the teachings of Jesus regarding higher consciousness are more relevant to "salvation" and, therefore, should be the most important to his followers.

Clearly, humans have misperceived the universe around them for millennia and are continuing to do so. It is also obvious that we accept the current belief systems of our different stages in history as truth. Humans create self fulfilling prophecies through their cultural myths. (If the atheist Richard Dawkins had been born in ancient Greece he probably would have had great “faith” in the Ptolemaic view of a geocentric universe since Ptolemy’s calculations were so amazingly accurate scientifically. (If I am incorrect about this assertion, please blame my History of Astronomy professor from undergraduate college)

Of course, “god” is a concept that has been interpreted in many different manners by almost every different belief system and by different individuals within the belief systems. Could “god” be the collective consciousness of all space and time that exists in the transcendent order (see Einstein’s absolute space-time, David Bohm’s implicate order, Stephen Hawking’s time has no boundary proposal, etc.) which is actually “created” in the explicate order by conscious beings’ experiences. In other words do our impermanent conscious experiences in the historical dimension create the “god” of the transcendent ultimate dimension. While “god” may be irrelevant in Buddhist thought and practice, (especially as an interceding being) doesn’t the collective consciousness of the ultimate dimension (Zen master Thich Nhat Hanh’s terminology) lead to a similar transcendent, universal, absolute “being”? Does the seemingly illusory emotion of love that has become an aspect of human survival due to evolutionary change and adaptation actually “create” the love of “god” that exists in the implicate, transcendent, absolute order of reality?

If more people could realize the interdependent nature of all life and things in the universe (Thich Nhat Hanh calls it “interbeing”), and overcome the illusory independent self, then many of the world’s egocentric caused problems would cease.
Did the evolution of our species allow us to create vivid conceptual images of the past, present and future as a survival technique in a world with bigger, stronger competition? Is not the knowledge of good and evil a manner by which intelligent, self-aware beings conceptualize their apparent reality? Humans conceptualize their surroundings and phenomena in almost every moment of consciousness. Another necessary strategy for survival is the ability to distinguish one’s self from other selves. Other animals also seem to be able to distinguish their individual entities from other entities but to our knowledge, we may be the only animals to have evolved to the point of conceptual self reflection. (Genesis-they knew they were naked). But doesn’t our false, complex creation of an illusory “self” separate each “individual” from the true nature of the universe: Oneness!

If one looks deeply into their existence, one can determine that humans are not separate entities from the rest of the universe. In other words, we as physical beings are intimately connected to other “things” in the universe. We cannot survive without water, oxygen, vegetables, fruit, etc. and, therefore, we are a “part” of the “whole” Our ability to distinguish ourselves from other humans or animals or plants is an evolutionary strategy for self survival. But when you combine our intellectual abilities of conceptualization with our self awareness, we “create” a complex selfish entity. Within our thoughts over our lifetimes, we create an entity of self that attempts to protect itself from others and attach itself to people and to things. In Christian terminology this selfishness is defined as sin. Selfish acts and thoughts always cause the selfish person to suffer. Also, since in true reality we are part of all things, when we are selfless in thoughts and acts, we are one with God. Is this not essentially what history’s great spiritual teachers were teaching?

In my opinion, the central question to the inquiry into an "afterlife" is the determination of the nature of eternity. It appears that most people who are discussing this topic are presuming a "Newtonian" view of absolute time and excluding from the discussion the theory of absolute space-time as espoused by Einstein and Minkowski. While I will not attempt to explain the intricacies of the theories of relativity, suffice it to say that Einstein thought that the distinction between past, present and future is an illusion. Every moment of spacetime is a timeless entity in and of itself.

Eternity may not be endless time but, instead, eternity may be the timelessness of each moment which never "passes away" from the overall existence within absolute spacetime. Therefore, if eternity is timelessness and our conscious experiences are eternal, then our actions and thoughts exist in this timeless eternity, not as an individualistic “afterlife” but as a part of the whole of existence.
We have evolved to psychologically misinterpret much of "true" physical reality as Einstein and his progeny have expressed in not only the theories of relativity but also in quantum mechanics.
Therefore, if eternity is timelessness and our conscious experiences are part of this timelessness, then do our actions and thoughts exist in this timeless eternity? As theoretical physicist David Bohm stated: “Ultimately, all moments are really one. Therefore now is eternity" Or as theoretical physicist Brian Greene says: "Just as we envision all of space as really being out there, as really existing, we should also envision all of time as really being out there, as really existing too."

If you look at the ESSENCE of the consciousness teachings of all of the great spiritual teachers throughout history you will find an answer to the question of how to act and think in every moment of your life to touch YOUR subjective, relative part of the "kingdom of heaven" “nirvana”, “paradise” NOW

Christianity makes a lot more sense if one does not believe literally in a physical resurrection. It also becomes more appealing. With all we know today about quantum physics, resurrection on another non-phyical level is entirely believable.

Bishop Desmond Tutu said that the Resurrection is about more that the "revivication of a corpse". (I believe those were his words. Read his book "God has a Dream" if you want to fact check me).

Historically of course the Church has taught the "resurrection of the body". But this is easily put aside. I mean what is the "body" in the ultimate sense? I think it something more than physical. I think it is "essential" in the deepest sense of that word.

Another more crude way to say this is that the "physical" Resurrection is a fine "high school" understanding of the story, but when you get into college it's time to "put away childish things", as St. Paul said, and get on to some deeper levels of mystery.

To answer the question, yes. Why, because I heard the Word of God. Back in June of 1985, while driving eastbound on the old Davison Freeway, at the border of Highland Park, and the eastside of Detroit, Michigan. To make a long story short, here's what I heard. "You are a good man." "All men have purpose." "You have purpose." "White man help the black man." "Organize." Was a lost 27 year old, living on the eastside of Detroit, back then.
After reading the Bible for the last twenty two years, I know that God and Jesus are still with me. May God Help Us All

RE: Course notes from a Catholic University Theology class......

Thank you .....your notes further convince me that my decision to leave the Catholic church was right on target!!! HE IS RISEN!

RE: Course notes from a Catholic University Theology class......

Thank you .....your notes further convince me that my decision to leave the Catholic church was right on target!!!

A different question would be: could the resurrection have happened but the tale we have been told is not what happened? There seems to be some Force present but we don't seem to know its real nature.

Christianity needs to redefine itself and get away from the Old Testament as we really don't know that it was written when and as postulated.

Humanity needs some quidelines to maintain civilized society but the hard and fast rules made up by men doesn't seem any longer to be the way to go.
George Bush has ended, or rendered useless, the concept of rules made by the God of the Universe and given to men to live by.

Happy Bunny Day to everyone since Easter did not happen!!

Can you still be a Christian without the Resurrection? There are too many flaws to include the resurrection story in the current Christian orthodoxies . Clean it up and see what is left historically and then redefine Christianity.

Some facts:

From an analyses of the documents by many contemporary NT exegetes:

The Resurrection is fiction i.e. it was added to make Jesus akin to the Caesars and Greek half gods/half men.

(1a) Mark 8:31-33 = Matt 16:2l-23 = Luke 9:22, (1b) Mark 9:9b = Matt 17:9b, (1c) Mark 9:12b = Matt 17:12b, (1d) Mark 9:30-32= Matt 17:22-23 = Luke 9:43b-45, (1e) Luke 17:25, (1f) Mark 10:32-34 = Matt 20:17-19 = Luke 18:31-34, (1g) Matt 26:1-2, (1h) Mark 14:21 = Matt 26:24 = Luke 22:22, (1i) Mark 14:41= Matt 26:45b,(1j) Luke 24:7

Conclusion: Many references but only a single attestation and from the Second stratum (60-80 AD).

http://wiki.faithfutures.org/index.php/017_Resurrection_of_Jesus

From the course notes of a large Catholic university's graduate theology class:

"Heaven is a Spirit state (no physical bodies abide there.)

Christ's and Mary's bodies are therefore not in Heaven. For one thing, Paul in 1 Cor 15 speaks of the body of the dead as transformed into a "spiritual body." No one knows exactly what he meant by this term.

Most believe that it to mean that the personal spiritual self that survives death is in continuity with the self we were while living on earth as an embodied person.

The physical Resurrection (meaning a resuscitated corpse returning to life), Ascension (of Jesus' crucified corpse), and Assumption (Mary's
corpse) into heaven did not take place.

The Ascension symbolizes the end of Jesus' earthly ministry and the beginning of the Church.

Only Luke's Gospel records it. The Assumption ties Jesus' mission to Pentecost and missionary activity of Jesus' followers The Assumption has
multiple layers of symbolism, some are related to Mary's special role as "Christ bearer" (theotokos). It does not seem fitting that Mary, the body of Jesus' Virgin-Mother (another biblically based symbol found in Luke 1) would
be derived by worms upon her death. Mary's assumption also shows God's positive regard, not only for Christ's male body, but also for female
bodies."

Amazing how this agrees with Professor Crossan and many other contemporary NT exegetes' conclusions based on attestations and stratums.

Some added tidbits:

According to Reimarus as referenced in R.B. Stewart in his introduction to the recent book, The Resurrection of Jesus, Crossan and Wright in Dialogue,

"Reimarus (1774-1779) posits that Jesus became sidetracked by embracing a political position, sought to force God's hand and that he died alone deserted by his disciples. What began as a call for repentance ended up as a misguided attempt to usher in the earthly political kingdom of God. After Jesus' failure and death, his disciples stole his body and declared his resurrection in order to maintain their financial security and ensure themselves some standing."

From: K.C. Hanson and D. E. Oakman, Palestine in the Time of Jesus, Fortress Press, 1998. p.55

"Stories circulated to the effect that Alexander of Macedonia was not only the son of Philip II, but also of the god Zeus-Ammon (Plutarch, Parallel Lives, "Alexander" 2.1-3.2); Plato was the son of Ariston and the god Apollo (Diogenes Laertius, Lives of Eminent Philosophers 3.1-2), and Augustus was the son of Octavius as well as the god Apollo (Suetonius, Lives o f the Caesars 2.4.1-7). The extraordinary character of these elites reputedly stemmed from both their divine origins and their kingroups. Their kin-groups provided one form of legitimation-political right to the throne and/or social status (thus the importance of Joseph in Matthew's genealogy). Their divine procreation provided another: their honor was divinely ascribed, and their greatness as leaders derived from divine paternity."

No.