If we were created in God's image and all born sinners... what does that say about God?

[techboy]

[chipwhich]

Please techboy, don't tell me your religious "genius" is down to the level of pathetic internet images when asked the tough question.

Please tell me your intellect is greater than posting a silly image.

You are better than that.

[techboy]

Please techboy, don't tell me your religious "genius" is down to the level of pathetic internet images when asked the tough question.

I'm sorry, what was the tough question? Seriously, I mostly have no idea what you are talking about in this thread.

Was it your request for evidence that Jesus was born of a virgin? That's not tough. There is little to no historical evidence that Jesus was born of a virgin. The most that can be said about it, historically, is that there are multiple independent accounts of the claim, so it was very probably something attached to Jesus by his followers.

You keep bringing it up, but discussion on this point really is useless. As a Christian, I believe it happened, but I can't prove it. You seem to be skeptical. The most that could ensue in discussion would be the following conversation:

Christian: I believe Jesus was born of a virgin.

Skeptic: That's ludicrous.

What's the point?

If God exists, He'd have little difficulty making a woman give birth without a human father. Your repeated insistence that the idea is ludicrous is the point. If it wasn't ludicrous, it wouldn't be a miracle, and nobody would care.

I'm a little puzzled by your obsession with the Virgin Birth, anyway. It's not even the central miracle of Christianity. It's not like the earliest Christians ran around proclaiming the good news that Jesus was born of a Virgin. It's secondary to the story.

[chipwhich]

I'm a little puzzled by your obsession with the Virgin Birth, anyway. It's not even the central miracle of Christianity. It's not like the earliest Christians ran around proclaiming the good news that Jesus was born of a Virgin. It's secondary to the story.

Actually, no it's the centerpoint of christianity. Following the virgin birth of the profit. It's not that difficult to understand unless you want to make it difficult.

Christianity is based on a virgin birth, and catholicism, as well as all other christian religions are based on this simple concept.

It can easily be explained logically why 1/3 of the world are christians. It can't be easily explained why the other 2/3'rds aren't

[techboy]

Actually, no it's the centerpoint of christianity.

You're laboring under a misimpression. Mark is considered by most scholars to be the first Gospel written, and he doesn't even mention the Virgin Birth. Paul alludes to it, but never talks about it directly. If you'll check the preaching of the first Christians in Acts, it is not a prominent theme.

The "centerpoint of Christianity" can be found in 1 Corinthians 15 (NET Bible):

15:12 Now if Christ is being preached as raised from the dead, 9 how can some of you say there is no resurrection of the dead? 15:13 But if there is no resurrection of the dead, then not even Christ has been raised. 15:14 And if Christ has not been raised, then our preaching is futile and your faith is empty. 15:15 Also, we are found to be false witnesses about God, because we have testified against God that he raised Christ from the dead, when in reality he did not raise him, if indeed the dead are not raised. 15:16 For if the dead are not raised, then not even Christ has been raised. 15:17 And if Christ has not been raised, your faith is useless; you are still in your sins. 15:18 Furthermore, those who have fallen asleep 10 in Christ have also perished. 15:19 For if only in this life we have hope in Christ, we should be pitied more than anyone.

---------- Post added May-30th-2011 at 01:49 AM ----------

It can't be easily explained why the other 2/3'rds aren't

Oh, and for the record, regardless of the truth of this statement, it can't be because of the doctrine of the Virgin Birth. Muslims believe it too, though they don't see it as a sign of divinity.

[twa]

I hate to agree with Chipwich, but I feel it is central to Christianity....w/o the perfect sacrifice there is no remission of sin

Of course that need is predicated on belief in God and the existence of sin

To believe otherwise relegates Jesus to simply a great philosopher...simply rising from the dead ain't enough imo

[techboy]

I hate to agree with Chipwich, but I feel it is central to Christianity....w/o the perfect sacrifice there is no remission of sin

It's an important theological doctrine, but it is not the "centerpoint".

[twa]

It's an important theological doctrine, but it is not the "centerpoint".

Far enough,but I don't see any centerpoint in Christianity....unless you consider faith as such.

Doesn't Islam also support the virgin birth of Jesus?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islamic_views_of_Mary

chipwich needs to revise his percentages there ,but that also supports your assertion it is not the centerpoint obviously

[drtdrums]

On the subject of "Virgin Birth": It seems crucial that Christ is The Father's "only begotten son". I don't think John would have tried so hard to make that point if it wasn't important. Whether or not Mary had intercourse beforehand has no bearing on this fact. To be entirely clear, though, I believe the New Testament writers believed her to have conceived when having not known a man, and I defer to their personal and secondhand historical knowledge. I'm a Virgin Birth buyer-into-er.

[DRSmith]

Since it did not do so that seems a incomplete theory,and certainly short of the whole.

Perhaps God intended us to live our lives as we choose and Jesus's sacrifice was to enable options.

I think you mean it has not happened yet, you seem to forgot all Revelation has not happened yet

God took Abraham out and showed him the lands He would give him, but the time for them to answer for their error had not come yet, nor did it come for the next few generations

[AsburySkinsFan]

Your above posts further lower your credibility. I mean have an honest discussion, I am not an idiot, nor are you. 10 years of hebrew training hardly makes you an expert. But I would love to hear your ILR proficiency.

Well, since ILR is for living languages you'll forgive me if there is no ILR test for ancient Hebrew and Greek. What's more is I didn't say I had 10 years of Hebrew.

Tell ya what though I'll pass on the "imagers of God" interpretation to Dr. Lawson Stone who is an Old Testament Professor at Asbury Theological Seminary and was on the translation team for the New Living Translation Bible. I've got him on facebook, so if you'll be so kind as to post the argument for the "imagers of God" given by your favorite theologian I'll get his take on it.

---------- Post added May-30th-2011 at 11:28 AM ----------

I'm not sure I buy his interpretations of various passages, but your outright dismissal seems to indicate ignorance on your part, rather than his.

I never outrightly dismissed him, just his "imagers of God" interpretation. Sounds like just another PhD looking to find something to publish.

---------- Post added May-30th-2011 at 11:32 AM ----------

Techboy, you and ASF love to ignore post #63 and the concepts of the virgin birth which would be considered ludicrous in todays times But somehow in previous times it is acceptable.

It's funny.

I ignored it because it was a rambling mess that addressed nothing specific at all, it was a disjointed rant that wasn't even very good, what's more is you brought karma into a discussion of Christianity as if the two are even remotely compatible.

---------- Post added May-30th-2011 at 11:34 AM ----------

Please techboy, don't tell me your religious "genius" is down to the level of pathetic internet images when asked the tough question.

Please tell me your intellect is greater than posting a silly image.

You are better than that.

He posted it because your posts thus far are really as silly as that dog trying to fix electronics.

[chipwhich]

Well, since ILR is for living languages you'll forgive me if there is no ILR test for ancient Hebrew and Greek.

Exactly, which means your language ability in ancient Hebrew and Greek can be no more than elementary. You don't have the ability to grasp the translation as you can never put yourself into the living scenario.

I ignored it because it was a rambling mess that addressed nothing specific at all, it was a disjointed rant that wasn't even very good, what's more is you brought karma into a discussion of Christianity as if the two are even remotely compatible.

Point being, and on topic of this thread, religion ignores those with disabilities, mental, physical, and genetic and assumes people are of right mind.

He posted it because your posts thus far are really as silly as that dog trying to fix electronics.

Not silly, you take away the silliness of a virgin birth, and you are left with a philosopher or someone claiming to be a prophet.

Virgin birth would never pass the sniff test today. But people like to follow, so there would be followers and believers. Be it kool aid, golden plates, or virgin births.

[techboy]

He posted it because your posts thus far are really as silly as that dog trying to fix electronics.

Actually, I posted it because while I was looking for one of the "What is this I don't even" pictures to indicate my confusion, and I ran across it, and it made me laugh for like 20 minutes. It was close enough, so I put it up.

I'm still chuckling. It might just be me... my wife didn't think it was that funny.

---------- Post added May-30th-2011 at 12:40 PM ----------

Not silly, you take away the silliness of a virgin birth, and you are left with a philosopher or someone claiming to be a prophet.

You've done nothing to support this assertion other than to stubbornly repeat it, but I guess in any case that it's a good thing there's no good reason to take away the Virgin Birth.

Virgin birth would never pass the sniff test today.

Allow me to summarize your argument, if I may:

1. Miracles never happen. They are ridiculous.

2. The virgin birth was a miracle.

3. Therefore, the virgin birth never happened.

This is fantastic reasoning.

Seriously, why are you even bothering to discuss this then? If you begin with the assumption that nothing supernatural could ever occur, then you've only got one place to end up. You've short-circuited the discussion before it even begins.

[Burgold]

Chip,

A virgin birth (today) is not far fetched at all. There's artificial insemination and other procedures which could leave the woman a virgin, but impregnate her. Now, back then unless there were aliens or a divine miracle, it's harder to fathom how a virgin birth was possible. But it's certainly not impossible today.

[twa]

Point being, and on topic of this thread, religion ignores those with disabilities, mental, physical, and genetic and assumes people are of right mind.

How so?

Original sin and the results are generally linked to those.

Christianity also calls for and actively practices helping them in both the spiritual and physical aspects.

The Houston medical center seems rather linked to religion....as do many others in the US

[techboy]

Exactly, which means your language ability in ancient Hebrew and Greek can be no more than elementary. You don't have the ability to grasp the translation as you can never put yourself into the living scenario.

Maybe the dog picture was more accurate than I thought.

Seriously, you might want to investigate textual criticism and try to understand how it works before you make ridiculous comments like this.

[chipwhich]

Seriously, why are you even bothering to discuss this then? If you begin with the assumption that nothing supernatural could ever occur, then you've only got one place to end up. You've short-circuited the discussion before it even begins.

There can be god an religion without the virgin birth, in case you weren't aware.

Your 1, 2, and 3 analogy is just silliness to try and circumvent that which you have no answer.

I haven't witnessed any miracles personally.

---------- Post added May-30th-2011 at 12:51 PM ----------

How so?

Original sin and the results are generally linked to those.

Christianity also calls for and actively practices helping them in both the spiritual and physical aspects.

The Houston medical center seems rather linked to religion....as do many others in the US

So a baby born with a sever genetic disorder is a result of original sin?

[Metalhead]

Not silly, you take away the silliness of a virgin birth, and you are left with a philosopher or someone claiming to be a prophet.

Virgin birth would never pass the sniff test today. But people like to follow, so there would be followers and believers. Be it kool aid, golden plates, or virgin births.

Pretty much. If the pentateuch was published for the first time ever right now, with today's science and technology, it would be tossed aside. Those that even claim to be Jesus or talk to God are labeled as crazy immediately.

[techboy]

There can be god an religion without the virgin birth, in case you weren't aware.

Sure, but the only reason you've offered to reject the idea is that it's supernatural, and supernatural events don't occur.

Guess what? If you start by excluding the supernatural from even consideration, you can't have "god and religion", as you say.

You've short-circuited the discussion. You have committed the informal logical fallacy of begging the question.

---------- Post added May-30th-2011 at 01:08 PM ----------

Your 1, 2, and 3 analogy is just silliness to try and circumvent that which you have no answer.

Oh, and it's not an analogy. It's your argument as it would be presented in formal logical form. If you don't think I've represented your position accurately, please tell me which premise, 1 or 2, does not accurately represent your views, or if the conclusion (3) does not represent your conclusion.

Because if it seems ridiculous to you as it's written (and it is), that's only because your argument is itself pretty ridiculous.

[twa]

So a baby born with a sever genetic disorder is a result of original sin?

Why not?....If you accept the premise that death to humans and suffering began with it.

If not ...random gene mutation or the combination of the parents genes ect.

Neither explanation changes the reality....nor are they really in conflict.

[chipwhich]

Sure, but the only reason you've offered to reject the idea is that it's supernatural, and supernatural events don't occur.

By that logic, I would not be allowed to reject any of mans claim of any event being supernatural. I would have to accept all things earmarked as supernatural.

I believe in a Deity, it's the interpretation of such things that is human failure for generations.

---------- Post added May-30th-2011 at 01:38 PM ----------

Why not?....If you accept the premise that death to humans and suffering began with it.

If not ...random gene mutation or the combination of the parents genes ect.

Neither explanation changes the reality....nor are they really in conflict.

Well then why would humans be created with such drastic differences in their "orignal sin" level....so to speak?

[Prosperity]

I think the original sin concept is more of a metaphor for overcoming the base nature of the material world. (Course Christianity has the whole Christ dying for your sins, which includes the original onces I guess... but most religions have some sort of concept for evil/ignorance/sin that is just innate part our universe) But I don't think it's supposed to a points based system or something that rigid.

[techboy]

By that logic, I would not be allowed to reject any of mans claim of any event being supernatural. I would have to accept all things earmarked as supernatural.

Um, but...

I believe in a Deity,

So by your way of thinking, accepting any supernatural claim (or even admitting the mere possibility of it) automatically means we must accept them all.

You believe in a Deity, i.e. you accept a supernatural claim.

Why haven't you been transformed into a credulous twitching mass that believes in every tenet of Christianity, Islam, Judaism, Hinduism, Buddhism, and every other religion ever found on Earth, all at once, even where they contradict each other?

[AsburySkinsFan]

Exactly, which means your language ability in ancient Hebrew and Greek can be no more than elementary. You don't have the ability to grasp the translation as you can never put yourself into the living scenario.

Utterly hilarious, do you just make up the rules as you go?

Point being, and on topic of this thread, religion ignores those with disabilities, mental, physical, and genetic and assumes people are of right mind.

Religion does no such thing, C.S. Lewis in fact said that Jesus was either a liar, insane or right...you choose.

Not silly, you take away the silliness of a virgin birth, and you are left with a philosopher or someone claiming to be a prophet.

So if you exclude the possibility of the miraculous then you can also exclude the possibility of the resurrection, how about if we just exclude the possibility of the divine then we can win the whole debate right? See you want to win a debate by excluding everything you don't like and then you want to act like you've proved something. The sky is not blue, and the reason I know that it's not because I exclude any evidence or testimony that would say that it is....see I win.

Virgin birth would never pass the sniff test today. But people like to follow, so there would be followers and believers. Be it kool aid, golden plates, or virgin births.

For a skeptic sure, but I believe in miracles.

[Mickalino]

How did I contradict myself?

In your first sentence you called it a "myth" that humans were created in God's image. Then in your 6th sentence you stated we are "thus created in the image of God". It's a pretty clear contradiction. Here is your actual quote :

The people that created the myth that "humans" were created in his image are the same people claiming that you are born a sinner and can simply confess your sins away.

1. You are accountable for your actions and "sins"

2. Mother Father Creator God created everything from himself/herself. Everything is energy. God is energy. As a spirit you are energy thus created in the image of God. To think that a "human" was created in the "image" of God seems kind of outlandish.

3. And, no, Jesus did many things, but he did not die for your sins (but that is another story)

When you die, go to the light, meet your guide, and discuss the matter.

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

And lastly, Hell does not exist except for in the mind of man. How the Religions have taken that and run with it. If God is Love, why would he allow Hell? Just not that complicated.

Let me ask you a question in response to this statement - Does your father love you ?