I love how these "christians" feel it is ok to lie as long as they are lying to advance their agenda.
Lying for Jesus. Shit, Googling that phrase shows there's an Urban Dictionary entry... http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=lying for jesus ...and a book. http://www.amazon.com/Liars-For-Jesus-Religious-Alternate/dp/1419644386
I don't believe in lying for Jesus. That whole "do not bear false witness" thing kinda gets in the way.
That could be taken a couple ways. Do you believe one shouldn't lie for Jesus? OR, do you not believe that people DO lie for Jesus? Cuz, they plainly do, which would mean it doesn't count as lying if it's for Jesus. I could agree with the former, the latter, not so much.
Is this a serious question? Obviously I mean one shouldn't "lie for Jesus". That doesn't mean that there is no such thing as truly honorable and altruistic dishonesty. The proverbial "No, Mister SS trooper, I have no Jews in my house" comes to mind.
No, I have to ask, I've debated some shady damned Christians. I take nothing for granted anymore. Yeah, of course. I just need persuading with some damned good logic that homophobic businesses and creationism in the classroom meet that "Jews in the attic", standard.
It is a shame so many self declared Christians do. Hell, much of the evangelical movement is based upon lying for Jesus.
yup, something fucked up on my old laptop and for some reason wouldn't load WF, i even tried using IE, but, new laptop, so i'm back.
Why does it have to be "physically"? You are using circular logic here, by assuming that the physical realm is the totality of existence, then trying to use that claim to require that he be somewhere physically, then expecting the inability to answer that meaningless question to somehow tend to support the claim that the physical realm is the totality of existence.
I haven't used any logic, I've asked a question, and you're unfortunately jumping to unwarranted conclusions about my motiviation for said question. It is my understanding that Jesus is alleged to have taken normal human (physical) form following his alleged resurrection. Is this not the case? Was he some form of spirit?
He rose bodily, yes. That is the clear teaching of Scripture. But why take one Biblical account as factual and ignore the well-known account of what happened 40 days later?
I'm not taking anything as factual. I take both as obvious embellishment. You're still not answering the question. Did he cease to exist physically after 40 days? Where is he physically?
Isn't the use off the Bible to demonstrate the truth of the Bible a bit of that circular logic you disfavor?
Please explain why you think the question "Where is he physically?" has any meaning, or ought to have any meaning, and can therefore be answered.
I'm not getting your confusion. Allegedly, following his resurrection, he was physically alive and present in Jerusalem or thereabouts. Then, allegedly, a short time later (conveniently for those who might be asked to verify his presence following said resurrection at a reasonably young age) he was transported to "heaven". Did this process destroy his physical body? If not, then where is it?
I believe you are expecting "heaven" to have a time continuum parallel to ours, so that "now" in this world means something there. Otherwise, why would his physical body have to be either destroyed or be somewhere at this point in time? Or am I misunderstanding you?
If Jesus could be beamed up, why isn't everyone else? Why do we have to go through the whole "death", thing?
My point, is that you are telling somebody he is selective about scripture, even though there is no evidence presented that the scripture is accurate, aside from an assertion that it is.
If the average person only goes up as a disembodied mind, that's only 1-10 terabytes of storage per person that has to upload to Heaven's servers. But a whole guy? The atomic pattern of a whole human body is roughly 10 billion billion terabytes. Assuming Heaven has infinite harddrives, then...why not beam up everybody? But if they don't....why does Jesus get to hog the server space? Dispose of the body, and just keep the mind. It's basic desktop housecleaning we learned in the 90's.
If the story that Jesus rose from the dead physically is wrong, then the whole debate is meaningless. If it is correct, then there is every reason to believe that the further narrative about him "ascending into heaven" (meaning: going into the spiritual realm, whatever that is) is as well. Either way, his question is meaningful only if you assign one truth value to one of those narratives and the other to the other. That does not "prove scripture" in any way. It is simply an appeal for consistency.
I like to think of Him in Key Largo, FL. He has a store that sells snorkel and scuba diving equipment. Pretty much livin' the dream, man.
I am expecting that if "heaven" does not have similar physical laws, that the ones that it does have are logically consistent. If your answer is that Jesus' body is neither destroyed nor in existence then that's a logical contradiction, and it would seem that you're retreating into spurious mysticism to avoid giving an answer.
That is absolutely my dream, except the shop is in St. John, USVI. I guess Jesus and I have a lot in common.
