• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

"God doesn't make mistakes."

fuelair said:
Not sure there if you mean philosophy generally or just that person's same. I used to find it entertaining but more and more realized it was no more functional except simply as a way to approach certain things than the aforementioned mental masturbation Oooooor (think Buddy Sorrell) words are only as good as the reality they describe accurately.
Click to expand...

I was referring specifically to Frank Tippler's use of the concept of the multiverse to explain evil, suffering, etc.
 
"god does not make mistakes" is a terrible idea that can give license to pious bigots to attack and even kill the deemed less fortunate as being agents of evil.
 
Marduk said:
This is another of those "I didn't pay attention at sunday school threads" isn't it
this existence to evangelicals is irrelevant, its the next one where all the questions are resolved, anything that happens here is a test of faith
;)
Click to expand...

Of course if one thinks this existence is irrelevant, then the love of a husband and wife or the love between parents and children, or, indeed the whole subject of brotherhood, all of these, must be irrelevant.
 
TimCallahan said:
Of course if one thinks this existence is irrelevant, then the love of a husband and wife or the love between parents and children, or, indeed the whole subject of brotherhood, all of these, must be irrelevant.
Click to expand...

well the fact that God approved marriage lasts until death and not a moment longer should tell you something
;)
 
Craig B said:
And similarly Christians should thank Judas who ensured that Jesus would be crucified and "die to save us all"!
Click to expand...

Well, Judas is even more weird. And indeed all four narratives make it sound like it was in the plan all along that Jesus be crucified there, so it's not clear at all if the guy even had much of a choice there. I mean, imagine a scenario where Judas decides to tell the authorities, "Nah, I've been with that guy, he's gone to preach in Damascus. Should be on the other side of the mountain by now." There is no way for Jesus to even foresee exactly who will betray him (which he does) unless Judas has no free will at that point OR is in on the scheme.

But we get to the more interesting part with that. Luke seems to have seen the same problem, because he actually doesn't leave Judas any free will there. In Luke 22:3, Satan personally enters Judas and basically it follows that he's actually the one who did all that.

And, hey, Luke is canon and DOC even tells me he's a great historian, so I'll believe Luke about the Satan part ;)

Which just makes that problem even weirder. Then Satan himself actually lends a hand to Jesus fulfilling his mission. Which is weird, really. Combined with the whole temptation episode, where really Satan doesn't come across as the bad guy anyway, Satan is actually kinda Jesus's little helper.
 
Hellbound said:
You know, the whole "no accidents" thing pretty much puts paid to the idea of free will, also. If it's all God's plan, then he's responsible for (to take earlier examples) making the drunk driver kill people or forcing the rapist to commit his act. So his plan essentially chooses out people to be damned...which also directly contradicts several scriptures...those that talk about how every soul is sacred, God would save everyone if he could, etc, etc, etc.
Click to expand...

It would however be consistent with other parts. Paul for example makes a pretty good case that God WANTS to damn some people. Mark too tells us that Jesus spoke in parables deliberately so some people would not understand and not be saved. Heck, it's not even as much "Mark tells us", as a case of Mark telling us that Jesus himself said so.

ETA: it gets even weirder if you read Paul through the glasses of modern fundie theology. E.g., Paul tells us in Romans that as punishment for their lack of faith, God made a whole bunch of people gay and a bunch of women lesbians. And the way I read it, it's not even a case of making them lust for the same sex, but actually making sure they do it. But wait a minute, it's not even just that God effectively overrides those people's will with that (we already saw that Paul has no trouble with that), but is making them do some things he condemns. Or at least the fundies tell me he condemns that.

What for? So he can them fry them on bigger flame? I mean, effectively there God acts like the kind of "parent" who'll kick you out of the hour after curfew, so he can then beat you up for breaking curfew.
 
Last edited:
HansMustermann said:
Well, Judas is even more weird. And indeed all four narratives make it sound like it was in the plan all along that Jesus be crucified there, so it's not clear at all if the guy even had much of a choice there. I mean, imagine a scenario where Judas decides to tell the authorities, "Nah, I've been with that guy, he's gone to preach in Damascus. Should be on the other side of the mountain by now." There is no way for Jesus to even foresee exactly who will betray him (which he does) unless Judas has no free will at that point OR is in on the scheme.

But we get to the more interesting part with that. Luke seems to have seen the same problem, because he actually doesn't leave Judas any free will there. In Luke 22:3, Satan personally enters Judas and basically it follows that he's actually the one who did all that.

And, hey, Luke is canon and DOC even tells me he's a great historian, so I'll believe Luke about the Satan part ;)

Which just makes that problem even weirder. Then Satan himself actually lends a hand to Jesus fulfilling his mission. Which is weird, really. Combined with the whole temptation episode, where really Satan doesn't come across as the bad guy anyway, Satan is actually kinda Jesus's little helper.
Click to expand...



Don't forget that Jesus actually HEXES the bread he gives to Judas to eat and CAUSES Satan to possess Judas.

So it is not even Satan doing it on his own accord....it is Jesus orchestrating and directing the whole shebang.

Judas and even Satan were only playing their scripted parts in the FARCE that Jesus had written and directed and acted in.

John 13:21-27 (Jesus Tells Who Will Turn Against Him)
After Jesus said these things, he felt very troubled. He said openly, “Believe me when I say that one of you will hand me over to my enemies.”

His followers all looked at each other. They did not understand who Jesus was talking about. One of the followers was next to Jesus and was leaning close to him. This was the one Jesus loved very much.

Simon Peter made signs to this follower to ask Jesus who he was talking about. That follower leaned closer to Jesus and asked, “Lord, who is it?”

Jesus answered him, “I will dip this bread into the dish. The man I give it to is the one.” So Jesus took a piece of bread, dipped it, and gave it to Judas Iscariot, the son of Simon.
When Judas took the bread, Satan entered him. Jesus said to Judas, “What you will do—do it quickly!”​
 
TubbaBlubba said:
This isn't gospel, this is ancient, poorly disguised gay porn.
Click to expand...


:D

Also consider the connotations of these verses in the that light

John
{13:4} He riseth from supper, and laid aside his garments; and took a towel, and girded himself. {13:5} After that he poureth water into a bason, and began to wash the disciples’ feet, and to wipe them with the towel wherewith he was girded.

{13:23} Now there was leaning on Jesus’ bosom one of his disciples, whom Jesus loved.​


Mark
{14:51} And there followed him a certain young man, having a linen cloth cast about his naked body; and the young men laid hold on him: {14:52} And he left the linen cloth, and fled from them naked.​
 
As far as the betrayal by Judas is concerned, Paul doesn't seem to know anything about it (1 Cor.15:3 - 8, emphasis added):

For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received, that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the scriptures, and that he appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve. Then he appeared to more than five hundred brethren at one time, most of whom are still alive, the some have fallen asleep, then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles. Last of all he appeared to one untimely born, he appeared to me.

Given that James is clearly in charge of the Jerusalem church - over Peter - in Galatians, it would appear that a later editor has altered the text, placing James far down in the order of those who saw the risen Christ. Also, Cephas (Peter) would have been one of the twelve. The 500+ brethren who saw Jesus at one time would also appear to be a later addition, since none of the gospel writers seem to have heard of them. Thus, if we were to try to write this text in its original form, it might go a follows:

For I delivered to you as of first importance what I also received, that Christ died for our sins in accordance with the scriptures, that he was buried, that he was raised on the third day in accordance with the scriptures, and that he appeared to James, then to the twelve, then to all the apostles. Last of all he appeared to one untimely born, he appeared to me.

What's important here is that, according to Paul, the risen Christ appeared to the twelve. That would have to include Judas. Thus, the myth of the betrayal would have to have been developed sometime between when Paul wrote 1 Corinthians - possibly ca. CE 55 - and ca. CE 70, the earliest date Mark could have been written.
 
TimCallahan

Moreover, Paul was in frequent dispute with the apostles. If one of them had betrayed Jesus, and this was known to Paul, it is inconceivable that he wouldn't have made use of that knowledge.
 
@TimCallahan,

Wasn't there a reference in the Bible to Judas being replaced by someone else, bringing the number of apostles back up to 12? Was that before or after the resurrection? (Sorry, I don't have time to look it up now)
 
I think so, and it should be before. I mean, for example, Paul tells us that the resurrection was witnessed by "the twelve". IF you take that to mean the 12 apostles, as the church does, then clearly there were 12 at the time of the resurrection. Unless they let Judas hang around with them after he had just given Jesus to the authorities for a bit o' cash, they must have replaced him with someone else between the betrayal and the resurrection
 
Last edited:
Jon. said:
@TimCallahan,

Wasn't there a reference in the Bible to Judas being replaced by someone else, bringing the number of apostles back up to 12? Was that before or after the resurrection? (Sorry, I don't have time to look it up now)
Click to expand...



It is in Acts 1:23-26. They elected Matthias. This was AFTER Jesus went back up for the last time in Acts 1:9.


Acts 1 said:
9 After he said this, he was taken up before their very eyes, and a cloud hid him from their sight.

12 Then the apostles returned to Jerusalem from the hill called the Mount of Olives, a Sabbath day’s walk[c] from the city. 13 When they arrived, they went upstairs to the room where they were staying. Those present were Peter, John, James and Andrew; Philip and Thomas, Bartholomew and Matthew; James son of Alphaeus and Simon the Zealot, and Judas son of James. 14 They all joined together constantly in prayer, along with the women and Mary the mother of Jesus, and with his brothers.


21 Therefore it is necessary to choose one of the men who have been with us the whole time the Lord Jesus was living among us, 22 beginning from John’s baptism to the time when Jesus was taken up from us. For one of these must become a witness with us of his resurrection.”

23 So they nominated two men: Joseph called Barsabbas (also known as Justus) and Matthias. 24 Then they prayed, “Lord, you know everyone’s heart. Show us which of these two you have chosen 25 to take over this apostolic ministry, which Judas left to go where he belongs.” 26 Then they cast lots, and the lot fell to Matthias; so he was added to the eleven apostles.
Click to expand...
 
Jon. said:
@TimCallahan,

Wasn't there a reference in the Bible to Judas being replaced by someone else, bringing the number of apostles back up to 12? Was that before or after the resurrection? (Sorry, I don't have time to look it up now)
Click to expand...
Look at Acts 1:10-23. It was after the resurrection. Jesus departs skyward in Acts 1:9. And it was Matthias who was chosen, by lot.
 
Which is a bit of a contradiction with Paul's telling us it was "the twelve" who witnessed it, though, isn't it?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom