Christian Civilization -- The Central Issue

[Alexis Jacobi]

Your hubris is extraordinary. But that's between you and God, I suppose.

God must have a better sense of humor than you!

(If not my goose is cooked!)

[Gary Childress]

Your hubris is extraordinary. But that's between you and God, I suppose.

God must have a better sense of humor than you!

(If not my goose is cooked!)

OK. Sorry. Should I call you an "ignoramus" too? I mean, just as a joke. You won't take it badly, will you?

[phyllo]

Man is an upright-walking tool-making killer-ape.

Man becomes human when man encounters a radically different current of possibilities.

Man already has the divine gifts that separate him from the animals and make him unique.

I described nature as it is: an utterly cruel system. Go to deep jungle. Sit yourself down. A swarm of marauding army ants will pass along and devour all your flesh without the slightest concern. That principle, that reality, runs through all nature, everywhere.

It is not •angelic• and in the language at our disposal if I say it is •demonic• I am only drawing the comparison. Nature is neither good nor bad — and certainly not evil.

But then — what does the devil (the demoniac, Satan) really refer to? In one sense it is the natural realm. I am not inventing this view. It was explored in detail in the 19th century.

Yet animals and humans survive in the jungle.

And the principle that runs through religion is that everything that comes from God is good.

No, it really isn’t. Christianity — the ultimate innards of the philosophy — is and always has been understood to be radicalism.

I do not disagree with notions of integration however. And man has no other option but to cooperate with earthly systems.

The “garden” refers to an immortal state that can only be recovered (according to the Christian story) after translation to that deathless realm they call ‘heaven’.

Though I do under your modification.

The original expectation was that the righteous people would return to the world in a physical form. The eternal life would be here. Some sort of eternal life in"heaven" was a later addition/change.

What? The story says that he came to restore man to a deathless condition in another realm of being.

Jesus came for the lost sheep. So that they would know God in this life.

The eternal life starts here with belief in Jesus. Another realm is not required.

Don't make me quote bible passages.

[Harbal]

Don't make me quote bible passages.

I concur with that; please don't make him quote Bible passages.

[Alexis Jacobi]

OK. Sorry. Should I call you an "ignoramus" too? I mean, just as a joke. You won't take it badly, will you?

I have an idea: call me, refer to me, exactly and precisely how you think I am. Neither less nor more.

Why on Earth should I take •badly• what you truly think of me (or anyone)? I respect honesty and directness.

[Gary Childress]

OK. Sorry. Should I call you an "ignoramus" too? I mean, just as a joke. You won't take it badly, will you?

I have an idea: call me, refer to me, exactly and precisely how you think I am. Neither less nor more.

Why on Earth should I take •badly• what you truly think of me (or anyone)? I respect honesty and directness.

Fair enough. I don't think you're an ignoramus. Maybe a bit unfair toward those who practice homosexuality and men whom you deem "unmasculine". I was brought up to stick up for people who appear to experience unjust social marginalization, though, I admit, I can probably be overzealous toward those who I think are unfair toward others. But maybe I am being unfair to you in my overzealousness. I have to acknowledge that.

[Alexis Jacobi]

The original expectation was that the righteous people would return to the world in a physical form. The eternal life would be here. Some sort of eternal life in"heaven" was a later addition/change.

Could you present me with the passages that support that? I would like to see.

[Gary Childress]

The original expectation was that the righteous people would return to the world in a physical form. The eternal life would be here. Some sort of eternal life in"heaven" was a later addition/change.

Could you present me with the passages that support that? I would like to see.

Bart Erhman makes that claim in his book, Heaven and Hell: A History of the Afterlife. Erhman is a straight up Bible scholar from what I've observed. He states in H&H that Judaism didn't have a concept of heaven or hell originally and that even early Christianity didn't. He notes that to the Greeks, Hades was a gathering place for ALL the dead regardless of what they did to other people in life. In fact, the only people who were specifically punished in Hades seem to have been people who defied the Gods (even in the name of helping humans - Prometheus for example). Haven't finished reading his book, though. Put it aside and haven't gotten around to returning to it.

[FlashDangerpants]

The original expectation was that the righteous people would return to the world in a physical form. The eternal life would be here. Some sort of eternal life in"heaven" was a later addition/change.

Could you present me with the passages that support that? I would like to see.

Corinthians 15:35-44

[Alexis Jacobi]

The original expectation was that the righteous people would return to the world in a physical form. The eternal life would be here. Some sort of eternal life in"heaven" was a later addition/change.

Could you present me with the passages that support that? I would like to see.

1 Corinthians 15:35-44

Most are familiar with that bit of scripture. In no sense does it support the notion of a return to a physical body in this world. Precisely the opposite.

[FlashDangerpants]

Could you present me with the passages that support that? I would like to see.

1 Corinthians 15:35-44

Most are familiar with that bit of scripture. In no sense does it support the notion of a return to a physical body in this world. Precisely the opposite.

https://www.catholic.com/tract/resurrection-of-the-body

The Bible tells us that when Jesus returns to earth, he will physically raise all those who have died, giving them back the bodies they lost at death.

These will be the same bodies people had in earthly life—but our resurrection bodies will not die and, for the righteous, they will be transformed into a glorified state, freed from suffering and pain, and enabled to do many of the amazing things Jesus could do with his glorified body (see 1 Cor. 15:35–44, 1 John 3:2).

The resurrection of the body is an essential Christian doctrine, as the apostle Paul declares: “f the dead are not raised, then Christ has not been raised. If Christ has not been raised, your faith is futile and you are still in your sins. Then those also who have fallen asleep in Christ have perished” (1 Cor. 15:13–18).

Because, as Paul tells us, the Christian faith cannot exist without this doctrine, it has been infallibly defined by the Church. It is included in the three infallible professions of faith—the Apostles’ Creed, the Nicene Creed, and the Athanasian Creed—and has been solemnly, infallibly taught by ecumenical councils.

The Fourth Lateran Council (1215), infallibly defined that at the second coming Jesus “will judge the living and the dead, to render to every person according to his works, both to the reprobate and to the elect. All of them will rise with their own bodies, which they now wear, so as to receive according to their deserts, whether these be good or bad [Rom. 2:6–11]” (constitution 1).

Most recently, the Catechism of the Catholic Church reiterated this long-defined teaching, stating, “‘We believe in the true resurrection of this flesh that we now possess’ (Council of Lyons II). We sow a corruptible body in the tomb, but he raises up an incorruptible body, a ‘spiritual body’ (cf. 1 Cor 15:42–44)” (CCC 1017).

As the following quotes from the Church Fathers show, this has been the historic teaching of the Christian faith on the matter since the very beginning.

[Gary Childress]

Could you present me with the passages that support that? I would like to see.

1 Corinthians 15:35-44

Most are familiar with that bit of scripture. In no sense does it support the notion of a return to a physical body in this world. Precisely the opposite.

I don't see where 1 Corinthians says the "opposite" of Christians returning to their bodies. People seem to be notorious for assigning many different meanings to passages. That such and such symbolizes this or that. Promises, promises (that no one knows with any remote certainty).

35 But someone will ask, “How are the dead raised? With what kind of body will they come?” 36 How foolish! What you sow does not come to life unless it dies. 37 When you sow, you do not plant the body that will be, but just a seed, perhaps of wheat or of something else. 38 But God gives it a body as he has determined, and to each kind of seed he gives its own body. 39 Not all flesh is the same: People have one kind of flesh, animals have another, birds another and fish another. 40 There are also heavenly bodies and there are earthly bodies; but the splendor of the heavenly bodies is one kind, and the splendor of the earthly bodies is another. 41 The sun has one kind of splendor, the moon another and the stars another; and star differs from star in splendor.

42 So will it be with the resurrection of the dead. The body that is sown is perishable, it is raised imperishable; 43 it is sown in dishonor, it is raised in glory; it is sown in weakness, it is raised in power; 44 it is sown a natural body, it is raised a spiritual body.

If there is a natural body, there is also a spiritual body.

[Dubious]

Exactly in that sense I refer to the meta-natural. It is no part of the natural systems of the Earth, and only enters the world through and with man.

Yes! But who, pray, isn't aware of this trite little fact? Nature created us through a long period of evolution and once we became aware and scared enough we created the gods whom we could pray to and implore. Metaphysics, which includes the entire realm of gods, has long operated as a sanitorium to keep the psyche in balance by placing itself within the precincts of a higher power.

If •nature has no plans• but man brings •plans• into the world it is in this exact sense that I mean.

Again, exactly right, proving that the whole metaphysical edifice devolves to humans only knowing well how unstable that can be. Nothing new here.

But really your largest issue, I’d imagine, is that you have no means to conceive of God in any sense, neither Aristotelean or Christian. So you will not give your assent to any of this.

God conceptions are among the easiest to derive or create: Why? Because it's a variable which has never been initialized by any known fact of god existing, whether in its Eastern or Western versions or no version at all. It's only our imagination and a psychological need for an overlord creating all the variable divinities contained in a global Pantheon of gods.

[seeds]

The Bible tells us that when Jesus returns to earth, he will physically raise all those who have died, giving them back the bodies they lost at death....

Umm...everyone, all together now, let's give that a great big...

...yikes!!! ...


_______

[seeds]

_______



_______