Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [Death To Religion] God Wins.

Expand Messages
  • a a
    Your discussion about mutations was funny. I have been busy as of late but I will respond to emails sent, soon. I just wanted to say that it s very very
    Message 1 of 1 , Jan 31, 2009
    • 0 Attachment
      Your discussion about "mutations" was funny. I have been busy as of late but I will respond to emails sent, soon. I just wanted to say that it's very very funny that Richard's last name is
      God   Win. So your family is the God Wins? God Wins. God Wins. I like that.
       
       Isn't that a bit ironic or perhaps just damn funny?
      Not to belabor but obvious but Is that really your last name? lolololol.
       

      --- On Fri, 1/30/09, Richard Godwin <meta@...> wrote:


      From: Richard Godwin <meta@...>
      Subject: Re: [Death To Religion] Slim to none.
      To: deathtoreligion@yahoogroups.com
      Date: Friday, January 30, 2009, 2:54 PM






      Mutations really work that way. Check out for instance biological
      mutations, far more negative to the species than anything positive. For
      example, genetic mutations in the brain of the embryo are what lead to
      handicapped babies, both physical and mental. But that's the way religions
      always have worked, still do, and probably will always do in the future. We
      see the same thing in Islam as it evolved. Also in Hinduism and Buddhism,
      but not as badly. Isn't it all about power struggle? Look at the huge
      about-face of Christianity when Emperor Constantine appropriated it for the
      State and made it what it became, as the persecuted became the powerfull
      persecutors supported by the Empire, and then the Popes. Look now at Ted
      Haggart.

      Richard.

      ----- Original Message -----
      From: "kschwiebert@ prodigy.net" <schwbert_98@ yahoo.com>
      To: <deathtoreligion@ yahoogroups. com>
      Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2009 7:05 PM
      Subject: Re: [Death To Religion] Slim to none.

      > I am sorry but this seems a little far fetched for the great creator
      > of all things to have to orchestrate for us to debate 2000 years
      > later. What did this mighty citadel of righteousness do for the next
      > many centuries? Slaughter, torture, enslave their fellow men? The
      > message could not be from the god the christians claim to worship or
      > it would not have mutated into what it became.
      >
      > --- In deathtoreligion@ yahoogroups. com, "Richard Godwin" <meta@...>
      > wrote:
      >>
      >> In the NT, Jesus did the first necessary thing for humanity's
      > salvation: be
      >> crucified. His followers did the second thing: develop a proto-
      > Christology
      >> in which Jesus was resurrected as the Messiah of the Jews, but
      > really for
      >> all humanity; that included the non-Jews, called Gentiles. Paul
      > did the
      >> third thing: spread this "news" (gospel) in the form of his
      > kerygma, using
      >> persuasion (polemics) to convert the hard-assed Jews and the
      > Gentiles to
      >> what became the new religion. His kerygma was first that the
      > Mosaic law was
      >> abrogated, and this affected the Jews who always lived under the
      > Torah, i.e.
      >> Torah law with its many rules and restrictions (so the Jews were
      > not happy
      >> with Paul!), and it affected the Gentiles who of course had no
      > Torah, so now
      >> they are on an even keel with the Jews with no Torah law. So
      > here's what I
      >> wrote some time ago is Paul's kerygma that he preached for
      > persuasion:
      >>
      >> Paul's solution is that the only way of salvation is through
      > ecstatic
      >> experience of the Risen Christ (to be dead to the law), which
      > results in
      >> unity with the divine ("in Christ" and "Christ in me"), through the
      >> faithfulness of Jesus Christ (not faith of man), the free gift of
      > God for
      >> those who believe (i.e. result of that ecstatic
      > experience), "retrieving
      >> God's promise to Abraham which was through Abraham's faith in God
      > (Gal.
      >> 3:22b). "It is done through Jesus Christ our Lord (Rom.
      > 7:25). "There is
      >> therefore now no condemnation for those who are in ("in union
      > with") Christ
      >> Jesus," as freedom from the law comes from "the spirit of life in
      > Christ
      >> Jesus" ("pneumatos zwes en Christw Iesou," Rom. 8:2). "For freedom
      > Christ
      >> has set us free" (Gal. 5:10). For Paul the only true covenant was
      > God's
      >> promise to Abraham (Gal. 3:17, Rom. 7:4, Eph. 2:14-16). Those in
      > union with
      >> Christ have died to the law, as in the difficult passage: Gal
      >> 2:19-20--"Though the law I died to the law, that I might live for
      > God; I
      >> have been crucified with Christ; and it is no longer I who live,
      > but it is
      >> Christ who lives in me. And the life I now live in the flesh I
      > live by
      >> faith, that of the (te tou) Son of God, who loved me and gave
      > himself for
      >> me". "For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on
      > Christ
      >> ("enedusasthe, " as in "putting on clothes". see 2 Cor. 5:4) (Gal
      > 3:27).
      >>
      >> Yes, from his ecstatic experience on the road to Damascus (then the
      > vision
      >> of the 3rd heaven), he "saw the light", literally and figuratively,
      > stopped
      >> persecuting the Christians, and joined them. That's the kind of
      > thing, as
      >> we see in history, that a very strong mystical experience can do to
      > the
      >> mind. Christians don't pay much attention to Paul's mystical
      > experience
      >> producing his conversion.
      >>
      >> Richard.
      >>
      >>
      >> ----- Original Message -----
      >> From: "kschwiebert@ ..." <schwbert_98@ ...>
      >> To: <deathtoreligion@ yahoogroups. com>
      >> Sent: Wednesday, January 28, 2009 7:00 PM
      >> Subject: Re: [Death To Religion] Slim to none.
      >>
      >>
      >> > I think we can have no argument that Paul was the founder of
      >> > western christianity, and that his only exposure to Jesus was,
      >> > supposedly a roadside vision. All kidding aside, god took the
      > form of
      >> > flesh, came to earth, performed amazing feats, was crucified, rose
      >> > from the dead, but still needed to make one more encore, cameo
      >> > appearance to Paul in order to do what? He needed OT in order to
      > get
      >> > his message across? A do-over? For the almighty?
      >> > For christians inside the fishbowl I guess this is no big deal.
      > For
      >> > the 67% of the rest of the world, it is a bit far fetched. The
      > fact
      >> > that Paul was a gifted and persuasive person is self evident, and
      > not
      >> > supporting proof of the veracity of his claims.
      >> >
      >> >
      >> > --- In deathtoreligion@ yahoogroups. com, "Richard Godwin" <meta@>
      >> > wrote:
      >> >>
      >> >>
      >> >> ----- Original Message -----
      >> >> From: "a a" <Praesto12@>
      >> >> To: <deathtoreligion@ yahoogroups. com>
      >> >> Sent: Wednesday, January 28, 2009 5:36 PM
      >> >> Subject: Re: [Death To Religion] Slim to none.
      >> >>
      >> >>
      >> >> Does it trouble anyone that St. Paul never knew the historical
      >> > Jesus?
      >> >>
      >> >>
      >> >> From a Christian world-view I would say that he in fact did. I'm
      >> > not
      >> >> troubled by criticizism of Paul because of what I see in his
      >> > writings and
      >> >> because he knew, and debated with Peter and other apostles. Take
      >> > Romans 7,
      >> >> in which Paul describes more brillantly than any counsler the
      >> > issues facing
      >> >> man, the struggle of flesh vs. the spirit. We all do things we
      >> > don't want to
      >> >> or later regret and we all don't do the things we want to do,
      > like
      >> >> excersise. I have not seen a schizoid personality convey so
      >> > articulately a
      >> >> message. Crazy creates more crazy, not more spiritual calm. Read
      > it.
      >> >>
      >> >> ----From a probable factual POV, Paul wrote earlier and the Jesus
      >> > traditions
      >> >> did not exist then (but Gospel Q and perhaps a Logia did), or at
      >> > least were
      >> >> not deciminated and they varied in what they said. Mark was the
      >> > first
      >> >> gospel, and with no post-resurrection traditions (following 16:8
      > a
      >> > Shorter
      >> >> ending and a Longer ending were added separately some times later
      >> > by
      >> >> interpolations) . And Q would have been along the time of Mark or
      >> > before,
      >> >> and it is only sayings of Jesus, no history. The Jesus history
      >> > developed
      >> >> over a period of time. This in no way is a criticism of Paul!
      > The
      >> >> remainder of what you have is irrelevant and pure
      > rationalization.
      >> >>
      >> >>
      >> >> That the entire modern christian church could not have been
      > founded
      >> >> without the activities of Paul in the Hellenistic world, and that
      >> >> christianity would have remained a small middle eastern cult had
      > he
      >> > not
      >> >> intervened?
      >> >>
      >> >> No, that's not true because all of the Apostles reached out to
      >> > people in
      >> >> many area. Peter to the Jews, Paul to Europe, James I believe
      > went
      >> > to
      >> >> India(where he was killed) and on and on. Immediately each writer
      >> > went out
      >> >> to spread the Gospel. So, even w/o paul the impact was going to
      >> > happen. But
      >> >> you're argument is also like saying that w/o a transmission a Car
      >> > goes
      >> >> nowhere, and while I agree I'd also say that the transmission' s
      >> > sole purpose
      >> >> from its creator is to make the Car go. It was made for that
      >> > purpose and it
      >> >> was meant to be there all along. Likewise Paul was infused with a
      >> > purpose
      >> >> from his creator and he served that purpose with his life.
      >> >>
      >> >> ----And you get that from an obviously biased polemic in Acts,
      > and
      >> >> apparently some tradition. There was no significant impact of
      > the
      >> > new
      >> >> religion, having been excluded by the Jews from their synagogues
      >> > (when GJohn
      >> >> was written), until the new Emperor Constantine adopted the
      >> > religion for
      >> >> assisting in unifying a broken Republic. Then it became the
      > State
      >> > church,
      >> >> as the persecuted became the persecuters.
      >> >>
      >> >>
      >> >> There are only 3 possibilities. One, that jesus really did
      >> >> appear to Saul of Tarsus as he travelled to Damascus, and
      > instructed
      >> >> him on what to do. Two, that a guilt ridden persecutor of
      > christians
      >> >> went a little crazy and conjured up this event or three, he made
      > the
      >> >> whole thing up. A reasonable jury would likely pick 2 or 3, but
      > not
      >> > 1.
      >> >>
      >> >> Why not just look at history and look at the impact of the
      > writings
      >> > of Paul
      >> >> and at the person of Paul himself? I think the question is more
      >> > general. The
      >> >> question, especially for the naturalist, is if God intervenes
      > with
      >> > his
      >> >> Creation, and does this include "miracles." We can discuss this
      >> > more if you
      >> >> like, but I think C.S. Lewis wrote a book on the matter so you
      > may
      >> > want to
      >> >> check that out.
      >> >>
      >> >> -----Not an objective observer.
      >> >>
      >> >>
      >> >> Christians quickly reject Islam and Mormonism as false, but
      >> >> accept the same unlikely scenario with Paul.
      >> >>
      >> >> This statement is false. I, as a Christian, have not rejected
      > Islam
      >> > quickly
      >> >> or Mormonism. Maybe the question is "why believe Paul and not
      >> > Muhammad or
      >> >> any other "prophet." I would say scriptual continuity. If you say
      >> > the same
      >> >> message again and again and again and then you saw something that
      >> > did not
      >> >> fit then you would know that it was out of place(over generalized
      >> > but I'm
      >> >> staying simple for the sake of illustration) . Let's say then you
      >> > saw
      >> >> something that fit in with all the rest and in fact it elucidated
      >> > (love that
      >> >> word) what went before even more then you'd have Paul's writings
      >> > compared to
      >> >> the rest of the Bible. Read it, find out, seek for yourself.
      > Islam
      >> > is
      >> >> actually talked about a good deal in the Bible. Morminism is
      > simply
      >> > too
      >> >> contradictory to be believable.
      >> >>
      >> >> ----"scriptual (sic) continuity": They do show an evolution
      >> > through time
      >> >> from Mark to Matt., who along with Luke borrowed from Mark and an
      >> > apparent
      >> >> missing document, dubbed Gospel Q. John is almost entirely
      >> > different in
      >> >> every way, and is later theological document, but some think he
      > got
      >> > the
      >> >> Jesus history stories from Matt. and/or Luke; however the so-
      >> > called "Signs
      >> >> Gospel" (miracles) is within John and much earlier. Not a lot of
      >> >> continuity, lots of borrowing and different POV's. Islam takes
      > off
      >> > from the
      >> >> Tanakh, and considers the NT as to interpolated and redacted as
      > to
      >> > be false,
      >> >> although it has very high respect for the real Jesus. You seem
      > to
      >> > have it
      >> >> backwards: Where do you see Islam in the Bible?
      >> >>
      >> >>
      >> >> Christians can spend thousands of words
      >> >> describing the superiority of their claims, but the fundamental
      >> > facts
      >> >> are as I have laid out here and the logic is inescapable
      >> >>
      >> >> Basically, No. The logic in forming the over all point of
      >> > discussion is not
      >> >> "inescapable. " However Christians can spend thousands of words
      >> > talking to
      >> >> people with deaf ears but I suppose we still should. I personally
      >> > think that
      >> >> God could and has slapped many people in the face and try to wake
      >> > them up to
      >> >> their own spiritual deaths, however many still won't listen. They
      >> > are
      >> >> willingly ignorant because "they" do not want to face their own
      >> > nature nor
      >> >> do they want Truth.
      >> >>
      >> >> -----I see no answer in that.
      >> >>
      >> >> Richard.
      >> >>
      >> >>
      >> >>
      >> >> --- On Wed, 1/28/09, kschwiebert@ <schwbert_98@ > wrote:
      >> >>
      >> >>
      >> >> From: kschwiebert@ <schwbert_98@ >
      >> >> Subject: [Death To Religion] Saint Paul-what are the odds he was
      >> > insane?
      >> >> To: deathtoreligion@ yahoogroups. com
      >> >> Date: Wednesday, January 28, 2009, 7:04 AM
      >> >>
      >> >>
      >> >>
      >> >>
      >> >>
      >> >>
      >> >> Does it trouble anyone that St. Paul never knew the historical
      >> > Jesus?
      >> >> That the entire modern christian church could not have been
      > founded
      >> >> without the activities of Paul in the Hellenistic world, and that
      >> >> christianity would have remained a small middle eastern cult had
      > he
      >> > not
      >> >> intervened? There are only 3 possibilities. One, that jesus
      > really
      >> > did
      >> >> appear to Saul of Tarsus as he travelled to Damascus, and
      > instructed
      >> >> him on what to do. Two, that a guilt ridden persecutor of
      > christians
      >> >> went a little crazy and conjured up this event or three, he made
      > the
      >> >> whole thing up. A reasonable jury would likely pick 2 or 3, but
      > not
      >> > 1.
      >> >> To accept proposition 1 we would then have to at least accept the
      >> >> possibility that the angel gabriel actually did recite the koran
      > to
      >> >> Mohammed, and that another angel recited the book of mormon to
      >> > Joseph
      >> >> Smith. Christians quickly reject Islam and Mormonism as false,
      > but
      >> >> accept the same unlikely scenario with Paul.
      >> >> The only logical conclusion is to reject all 3 scenarios as
      > false.
      >> > To
      >> >> do otherwise is to selectively reject the beliefs of over 1
      > billion
      >> >> people in favor of one's own, despite the fact that all 3 are
      > based
      >> > on
      >> >> some very shaky ground indeed. Christians can spend thousands of
      >> > words
      >> >> describing the superiority of their claims, but the fundamental
      >> > facts
      >> >> are as I have laid out here and the logic is inescapable.
      >> >>
      >> >>
      >> >>
      >> >>
      >> >>
      >> >>
      >> >>
      >> >>
      >> >>
      >> >>
      >> >>
      >> >>
      >> >>
      >> >>
      >> >>
      >> >>
      >> >>
      >> >>
      >> >> [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
      >> >>
      >> >>
      >> >> ------------ --------- --------- ------
      >> >>
      >> >> Yahoo! Groups Links
      >> >>
      >> >>
      >> >>
      >> >>
      >> >>
      >> >> ------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- -
      > ---
      >> > ------------
      >> >>
      >> >>
      >> >>
      >> >> No virus found in this incoming message.
      >> >> Checked by AVG - http://www.avg com
      >> >> Version: 8.0.176 / Virus Database: 270.10.14/1917 - Release Date:
      >> > 1/26/2009
      >> >> 6:37 PM
      >> >>
      >> >
      >> >
      >> >
      >> > ------------ --------- --------- ------
      >> >
      >> > Yahoo! Groups Links
      >> >
      >> >
      >> >
      >>
      >>
      >> ------------ --------- --------- --------- --------- --------- -
      > ------------
      >>
      >>
      >>
      >> No virus found in this incoming message.
      >> Checked by AVG - http://www.avg com
      >> Version: 8.0.176 / Virus Database: 270.10.14/1917 - Release Date:
      > 1/26/2009
      >> 6:37 PM
      >>
      >
      >
      >
      > ------------ --------- --------- ------
      >
      > Yahoo! Groups Links
      >
      >
      >

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

      No virus found in this incoming message.
      Checked by AVG - http://www.avg com
      Version: 8.0.176 / Virus Database: 270.10.15/1923 - Release Date: 1/29/2009
      7:13 AM


















      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.