- Status
R
rossum
Guest
Are they correct? As the thread title points out they cannot all be correct. They can all be incorrect.
Many Buddhists see Jesus as a Bodhisattva, which in Buddhist terms make Him higher than any god. Judging by their actions, most gods are not close to enlightenment: they demand animal sacrifices and they kill people for example.
There are more options for Jesus than just God, man or both.
U
upant
Guest
A
adf417
Guest
Agreed - to a point, but not completely.adf417:
it stands on what happened. Did He or Did he not die and come back to life? it can’t be yes and no.
“If Christ has not been raised, your faith is worthless.”
You may want to consider the law of noncontradiction, which i am just learning about so i am no expert. In your statement above since JWs believe Christ has risen, you make JWs Religion “worthwhile” and i dont think that is your intent.
Maybe “worthless” is not a good term to describe where you are going.
Peace!!!
Last edited:
O
openmind77
Guest
Obviously you would think that Jesus stands apart. But I am not sure what you mean by ‘more’ that a Son of God. There have been others who have claimed to be God too.
I don’t think they are incompatible, but none of them are perfect. Each has some flaws and inaccuracies.
U
upant
Guest
they do not believe his body was raised from what I know, they believe his spirit was raised.
have they risen from the dead physically?
there are contradictions that make them incompatible with each other, only one can be true.
the idea is to compare and contrast and see which is true, not settle for all paths lead to heaven.
O
openmind77
Guest
That belief is not as important to non-Christians
Not necessarily all of them can just be partly true…
Last edited:
F
FiveLinden
Guest
I have no idea what you mean.
A
adf417
Guest
I understand but now you are moving the goalposts which is why i recommended the book and chapter above discussing this in detail and why i said in my first post “ depends on your definition of “truth”, “partial truth”, “good”, “salvific”, “useful”.adf417:
they do not believe his body was raised from what I know, they believe his spirit was raised.
Your new requirement falls into the “partial truth” argument. Its a good and enlightening book.
Peace!!!
U
upant
Guest
it is important to people seeking the truth if it is true.
then why bother as Paul says
read the article, the goalpost hasn’t been moved.
A
adf417
Guest
O
OrbisNonSufficit
Guest
No, that would go against my faith. I am saying that Jesus could die through His humanity. There is nothing that suggests God can’t die neither anything that suggests death has any effect on Him. In other words it is theoretically possible for God to die but suffer no consequences of death. Anyhow, my answer to nature of Jesus would of course be diaphysitism or miaphysitism (both work).
By the way, when humans die they do not lose life either. Abraham died yet he is referred to as living person. Jacob died yet he is referred to as living person. We do not believe Jesus was dead when he died. We believe he rose “from the dead” but that phrase does not say he was dead. You can’t apply atheistical concept of human death to God… not successfully.
Yes, they can all be false.
O
openmind77
Guest
I doubt it. Nothing that hundreds of millions of people believe is completely false. There is a lot of truth in all major religions. But none of them are perfect or totally accurate.openmind77:
Yes, they can all be false.
O
OrbisNonSufficit
Guest
If they aren’t completely accurate they are objectively false. That does not mean every aspect they have is false ofc.
O
openmind77
Guest
If they are 70% or 80% accurate then that is not ‘objectively false’. That would be like saying newtonian mechanics is ‘objectively false’.openmind77:
If they aren’t completely accurate they are objectively false. That does not mean every aspect they have is false ofc.
R
rossum
Guest
But it goes against my logic. If some X has two opposed properties, then that X is a compound of two or more different parts.
That is ridiculous. If He was not dead then He did not die. If He died then He was dead. Those are the definitions of the words. Otherwise you are into Humpty Dumpty argumentation, where words mean what you want them to mean, not what it says in the dictionary.
How could he rise from the dead if He was not dead? Are you saying He “rose from the not-dead”? That is something I do in the morning. I am not dead and I rise.
Last edited:
O
OrbisNonSufficit
Guest
Well aren’t they? Subjectively things in them are true but it is still objectively speaking false thing.
O
OrbisNonSufficit
Guest
Yes, but humanity is not opposed to divinity. Even then, grey has black and white yet it isn’t partly white and partly black.
No they aren’t… not for God. Neither for humans apparently as we call Abraham and Jacob to be living people (and hence God is God of the living etc).
Our Lord came down to the dead and freed them, then He rose up in his physical body. That is how He rose from the dead. He rose from place of the dead.
O
openmind77
Guest
OK, if you say so. But in practical terms newtonian mechanics work fine or well enough in almost all cases.openmind77:
Well aren’t they? Subjectively things in them are true but it is still objectively speaking false thing.
O
OrbisNonSufficit
Guest
Yes, I am not denying that. But if we search for absolute truth we do not settle for newtonian mechanics. It may be good enough or precise enough. I guess that’s more of a terminological thing.
- Status