04 May 14
Originally posted by FMF
Well, for it to be coherent on some hypothetical level, either the theology is that he was a human or it isn't.
To echo something I posed to Grampy Bobby earlier in this thread ~ who ran away from it, as is his forum persona's modus operandi ~ it seems to me to be rather incoherent to BOTH celebrate the fact that he was a real human who was sacrificed and... TH ...[text shortened]... raits, or he wasn't. If he wasn't, then what is the big deal about him being only human to a degree?
Originally posted by FMF (Page 1)
Isn't the fact that he was a carpenter and earned a living from carpentry, for example, a "point of comparison" with other craftsmen and other ordinary people making their livelihoods? To me, it seems rather incoherent to BOTH celebrate the fact that he was a real human and THEN cancel all that out by insisting that "there is no point of comparison". OK, fine, if "there is no point of comparison" with other humans then what is the big deal about him being a human?
Originally posted by FMF (Page 3)
Well, for it to be coherent on some hypothetical level, either the theology is that he was a human or it isn't.
To echo something I posed to Grampy Bobby earlier in this thread ~ who ran away from it, as is his forum persona's modus operandi ~ it seems to me to be rather incoherent to BOTH celebrate the fact that he was a real human who was sacrificed and... THEN, to cancel all that out by suggesting that if He WAS fully human then His human death would not have counted for mankind as a substitute for sin.
He was either a walking talking human with all the human traits, or he wasn't. If he wasn't, then what is the big deal about him being only human to a degree?
"Rhetorical telepathy:
Some debaters want to talk about you; and not knowing you, they resort to fantasy. Common tactics:
• Informing you what your position is. A conservative correspondent, for instance, once told me that he considered Hillary Clinton the leader of the liberals. Dude, who the hell cares what you, a non-liberal, “consider” to be our leader?
• Theorizing about your motivations, psychology, or your sins. Another correspondent once opined that I opposed Clinton’s impeachment because I must be a fornicator.
• Creating a brain-dead parody of your position and pointing out its deficiencies.
These things don’t even make sense as a debating tactic— they can never be convincing, because an on-line stranger doesn’t know more about my brain than I do.
A more subtle form: trying to hold people accountable for your deductions from your description of their position. Maybe you think that Republican, or Democratic policy will be the ruination of the country. That doesn’t mean that your opponents have the actual intention of ruining the country and that you can ask why they want to do so. Who knows what’s on their minds; but a good guess is that they think they’re helping it. Helpful tip: people respond better to questions about their beliefs, even hostile ones, than to statements about them." http://www.zompist.com/arguing.html
04 May 14
Originally posted by Grampy BobbyAh ha! As ever, a long copy paste instead of responding to a point made in a discussion.
[quote]Originally posted by FMF (Page 1)
Isn't the fact that he was a carpenter and earned a living from carpentry, for example, a "point of comparison" with other craftsmen and other ordinary people making their livelihoods? To me, it seems rather incoherent to BOTH celebrate the fact that he was a real human and THEN cancel all that out by ins ...[text shortened]... beliefs, even hostile ones, than to statements about them." http://www.zompist.com/arguing.html
Can you or can't you defend your assertion about there being "no point of comparison" between Jesus and the humans he had become one of?
If you can't, no need for the copy pasted spam; go silent, and let your assertion just dangle there, contested.
If you can defend it, or explain it, then do. 🙂
04 May 14
Originally posted by FMF"Positive advice:
Ah ha! As ever, a long copy paste instead of responding to a point made in a discussion.
Can you or can't you defend your assertion about there being "no point of comparison" between Jesus and the humans he had become one of?
If you can't, no need for the copy pasted spam; go silent, and let your assertion just dangle there, contested.
If you can defend it, or explain it, then do. 🙂
A lot of this page will be about things going wrong, so let me start the other way. Here’s some guidelines for good arguments:
• Be the most civil person in the discussion. If you’re watching other people argue, often the angriest person comes off the worst.
• Stick to the issues.
• Use evidence. Provide URLs or cite books or your own experience to back up your claims.
• Use ‘I’ not ‘you’ statements. Talk about the other guy’s ideas, not about the other guy.
• People hate non-recognition more than they object to disagreement. They want to feel that their point is understood and acknowledged. It’s said that H.L. Mencken replied to all correspondents with the same statement: “There may be something in what you say.” Not a bad policy, unless the recipients compare notes.
• Admit when you don’t know, or were wrong.
• Acknowledge points of agreement. This doesn’t defuse the disagreements, but it’s polite, and tells people that you read everything.
• Choose your fights. Not everything is worth arguing about; nor is everyone a good arguing partner."
http://www.zompist.com/arguing.html
04 May 14
Originally posted by wolfgang59 (Page 1)
Surely it would have been very odd for a man of Jesus's age not to be married in those days?
Originally posted by Grampy Bobby
Yes, I'm sure. The Son of God, Jesus Christ, in hypostatic union [perfect humanity and undiminished deity in one person forever] on earth during the First Advent [appearance] was unique. There is no point of comparison: an awesome reality.
04 May 14
Originally posted by Grampy BobbyYet another copy paste!
[b]"Positive advice:
A lot of this page will be about things going wrong, so let me start the other way. Here’s some guidelines for good arguments:
• Be the most civil person in the discussion. If you’re watching other people argue, often the angriest person comes off the worst.
• Stick to the issues.
• Use evidence. Provide URLs or c ...[text shortened]... h arguing about; nor is everyone a good arguing partner."
http://www.zompist.com/arguing.html[/b]
04 May 14
Originally posted by Grampy BobbyForgive me for repeating myself. To me, it seems rather incoherent to BOTH celebrate the fact that Jesus was a real human [who would go on to sacrifice His human life] and THEN cancel all that out by insisting that "there is no point of comparison". If, as you claim, "there is no point of comparison" with other humans then what is the big deal about Jesus being a human?
Yes, I'm sure. The Son of God, Jesus Christ, in hypostatic union [perfect humanity and undiminished deity in one person forever] on earth during the First Advent [appearance] was unique. There is no point of comparison: an awesome reality.
Originally posted by FMFTo redeem mankind, Christ [the only perfect human being] was judged for every sin that has been committed or ever will be committed by the human race (2 Corinthians 5:14-15); Christ's unlimited atonement propitiated God the Father's Justice.
Forgive me for repeating myself. To me, it seems rather incoherent to BOTH celebrate the fact that Jesus was a real human [who would go on to sacrifice His human life] and THEN cancel all that out by insisting that "there is no point of comparison". If, as you claim, "there is no point of comparison" with other humans then what is the big deal about Jesus being a human?
04 May 14
Originally posted by Grampy BobbyBut are you, or are you not, claiming that He came down to earth as human and walked among humans as a human Himself? If you answer 'yes' but then also claim that there "there is no point of comparison" with other humans on account of Him supposedly being "the only perfect human being" then that makes the claim that he is "human" moot. How can there be "no point of comparison" between one human and another human? If A is definitely human [you and me, for example] and with B [Jesus in this case] "there is no point of comparison" with A, then on what basis do you claim B is a "human" in any meaningful sense? It comes across as a bit of incoherent dogma.
To redeem mankind, Christ [the only perfect human being] was judged for every sin that has been committed or ever will be committed by the human race (2 Corinthians 5:14-15); Christ's unlimited atonement propitiated God the Father's Justice.
Originally posted by FMFIf I may, in my opinion, Jesus was necessarily fully human to experience the trials of man. God had to become flesh to experience what man experiences, the hard life, the doubt, the insecurity. But He was also divine, and so was perfect, and without sin. While this does seem to beg the question of how can He know what it is truly like to be human if He's perfect, most humans are not perfect. It's because He was sent to show us what is possible. But we are not perfect, and so allowances are made. We cannot be as Christ, but the entire point is to try, to follow righteous ideals. It is to show us the ideal so that we may have a target, a goal. It's a high aim, to be sure, but a valiant one.
But are you, or are you not, claiming that He came down to earth as human and walked among humans as a human Himself? If you answer 'yes' but then also claim that there "there is no point of comparison" with other humans on account of Him supposedly being "the only perfect human being" then that makes the claim that he is "human" moot. How can there be "no point ...[text shortened]... you claim B is a "human" in any meaningful sense? It comes across as a bit of incoherent dogma.
04 May 14
Originally posted by SuzianneWhile this does seem to beg the question of how can He know what it is truly like to be human if He's perfect, most humans are not perfect.
Most humans are not perfect? So, some are?
It's because He was sent to show us what is possible. But we are not perfect, and so allowances are made. We cannot be as Christ, but the entire point is to try, to follow righteous ideals. It is to show us the ideal so that we may have a target, a goal. It's a high aim, to be sure, but a valiant one.
How can anything like this be genuine of even possible if, as has been suggested, "there is no point of comparison" between Jesus and humans?
- Joined
- 31 May 06
- Moves
- 1795
04 May 14
Originally posted by KingOnPointKingOnPoint,
Googlefudge,
Christ Jesus died for you. He included you when He died? Are you saying that dying for your eternal life is "no good reason?" Whatever your real name is, "say to yourself, I am no good reason for Jesus to have died for me." But instead of saying "I" use your real and whole name.
If you will not be glad that Jesus paid your way to God?
The idea of sin is idiotic and abominable, and the idea that someone else
can atone for my supposed crimes is equally ludicrous.
However even if your stories were true, and your god did exist...
Then I would despise your god, and do not want to spend ANY time with it
let alone an eternity.
On that subject, I don't want to spend an infinite amount of time anywhere.
So no, I would not be at all glad.
- Joined
- 31 May 06
- Moves
- 1795
04 May 14
Originally posted by Grampy BobbyYou fail at pretty much all of these.
[b]"Positive advice:
A lot of this page will be about things going wrong, so let me start the other way. Here’s some guidelines for good arguments:
• Be the most civil person in the discussion. If you’re watching other people argue, often the angriest person comes off the worst.
• Stick to the issues.
• Use evidence. Provide URLs or c ...[text shortened]... h arguing about; nor is everyone a good arguing partner."
http://www.zompist.com/arguing.html[/b]
04 May 14
Originally posted by googlefudgeOriginally posted by googlefudge
You fail at pretty much all of these.
You fail at pretty much all of these.
"• Use ‘I’ not ‘you’ statements. Talk about the other guy’s ideas, not about the other guy...
Helpful tip: people respond better to questions about their beliefs, even hostile ones, than to statements about them."
http://www.zompist.com/arguing.html
- Joined
- 31 May 06
- Moves
- 1795
05 May 14
Originally posted by Grampy BobbyYou don't HAVE any ideas to discuss.
Originally posted by googlefudge
[b]You fail at pretty much all of these.
"• Use ‘I’ not ‘you’ statements. Talk about the other guy’s ideas, not about the other guy...
Helpful tip: people respond better to questions about their beliefs, even hostile ones, than to statements about them."
http://www.zompist.com/arguing.html[/b]
You simply post other peoples.
You are a total empty shirt.
You are the last person here who should be giving anyone debating tips.