Is Jesus's "this generation will certainly not pass" valid grounds for scepticism?

[Cosmic Yak]

You have to wonder, as well, why this god would go to all the trouble of crafting these laws, only to jettison them as apparently unimportant at a later date. Was he just trying to make life difficult for a bunch of goatherders?

 

[Poem]

The evidence indicates otherwise.

The fact that you misunderstand and misrepresent the meaning of those particular lines speaks volumes about your knowledge of the Bible.

On the contrary, fire and brimstone and eternal damnation is all over the Prophecies. Isaiah, Joel, Ezekiel, all the lesser known books that come at the end of the Old Testament that everybody forgets exist. And for the record the phrase "gnashing of teeth" appears only in the Gospels, particularly Matthew. Everybody remembers Revelation, but Christian eschatology has its foundation in the Old Testament.

You have an atheist's interpretation of the Bible - in fact an antitheist's one. I don't believe you have ever studied the Bible as a Christian does - with Christian faith and belief, in adult bible study sessions (as opposed to Sunday school) - as I did. Your understanding of it is littered with hostility and naïvety.

There certainly is plenty of absurdity and cruelty in the Bible without making more of it up, and without tarring modern Christians with the absurdity and cruelty of ancient times.

Are you a Christian? If you are, would you care to respond to the OP?

 

[Poem]

You have to wonder, as well, why this god would go to all the trouble of crafting these laws, only to jettison them as apparently unimportant at a later date. Was he just trying to make life difficult for a bunch of goatherders?

Like you, I am a little confused by this - but I believe the logic is that nobody could fulfil the law except Christ. As Paul says in Romans 10:1-4:
Brothers and sisters, my heart’s desire and prayer to God for the Israelites is that they may be saved. For I can testify about them that they are zealous for God, but their zeal is not based on knowledge. Since they did not know the righteousness of God and sought to establish their own, they did not submit to God’s righteousness. Christ is the culmination of the law so that there may be righteousness for everyone who believes.

 

[Poem]

Also worth noting - Matthew 19:8
Jesus replied, “Moses permitted you to divorce your wives because your hearts were hard. But it was not this way from the beginning.

To me, this implies that the law as written is not necessarily as God intended - but may be concessional - thus Deuteronomy 24:1, which Jesus is referring to here.

However, I remain confused by Jesus's pledge to uphold the law - not one jot or title of which would disappear. If Deuteronomy 24:1 is NOT God's intention, then is Jesus still upholding it?

 

[Thermal]

Also worth noting - Matthew 19:8
Jesus replied, “Moses permitted you to divorce your wives because your hearts were hard. But it was not this way from the beginning.

To me, this implies that the law as written is not necessarily as God intended - but may be concessional - thus Deuteronomy 24:1, which Jesus is referring to here.

However, I remain confused by Jesus's pledge to uphold the law - not one jot or title of which would disappear. If Deuteronomy 24:1 is NOT God's intention, then is Jesus still upholding it?

"...till all be fulfilled." Jesus' death was that thar fulfillment.

 

[Darat]

Also worth noting - Matthew 19:8
Jesus replied, “Moses permitted you to divorce your wives because your hearts were hard. But it was not this way from the beginning.

To me, this implies that the law as written is not necessarily as God intended - but may be concessional - thus Deuteronomy 24:1, which Jesus is referring to here.

However, I remain confused by Jesus's pledge to uphold the law - not one jot or title of which would disappear. If Deuteronomy 24:1 is NOT God's intention, then is Jesus still upholding it?

You'll need to state which Chrisitan religion you want an answer from? Is it Roman Catholicism, Eastern Orthodox, 7th Day Evangelist, Mormonism and so on? There is no single doctrine bar Jesus is god (and even that is a bit shaky for some that claim they are a Christian religion).

 

[Poem]

You'll need to state which Chrisitan religion you want an answer from? Is it Roman Catholicism, Eastern Orthodox, 7th Day Evangelist, Mormonism and so on? There is no single doctrine bar Jesus is god (and even that is a bit shaky for some that claim they are a Christian religion).

Yes - and this disunity is a problem.

 

[Poem]

"...till all be fulfilled." Jesus' death was that thar fulfillment.

Yes, but there is no sense of antinomianism surely? Jesus's focus is on faith in him rather than human attempts to uphold the law.

 

[Thermal]

Yes, but there is no sense of antinomianism surely? Jesus's focus is on faith in him rather than human attempts to uphold the law.

Not sure what you mean? At the time, the law was in transition, with all that Jesus being in the process of fulfilling and all that. So his words are going to be loose too, whether they are read as " right here, right now" interpretations or "you know, in a couple weeks from now this is how you'll be rolling."

Eta: Jesus was laying out the new rules that people would be following just a little before they were actually in effect? No?

 

[theprestige]

Yes - and this disunity is a problem.

Problem for whom?

 

[Darat]

Yes - and this disunity is a problem.

For who?

 

[Poem]

Problem for whom?

It's problem whenever there is division surely? If God is as powerful as we might assume, then we naturally set the bar high when it comes to proof don't we?

 

[Poem]

Not sure what you mean? At the time, the law was in transition, with all that Jesus being in the process of fulfilling and all that. So his words are going to be loose too, whether they are read as " right here, right now" interpretations or "you know, in a couple weeks from now this is how you'll be rolling."

Eta: Jesus was laying out the new rules that people would be following just a little before they were actually in effect? No?

Okay - but while the focus would be faith - there is and never has been freedom to go sin?

BTW, I actually remain unaware of what faith in Christ means....as in, I'm not sure that it is possible.

 

[pgwenthold]

Let's forget God's supposed existence for a minute - you seriously think that humanity is just fine...isn't 'broken and bad' and doesn't need to 'see a doctor'?

Actually, no, I really don't see "humanity" as "broken and bad." But that doesn't mean that everything is "just fine."

Your doctor analogy fails. I get regular checkups with the doctor, occasionally go in for something acute, but generally, just regular checkups. And not because I am "broken" but because I want to monitor my health.

Same with my cars. My cars go in for regular checkups. That doesn't mean they are broken. In fact, most of the time, they report is that they are, indeed, "just fine." In fact, at our last checkup, our 2017 CRV was assessed as "doing great."

I do not accept the assertion that humanity is "broken and bad"

Not everything for everyone is just fine, but that's a far cry from "broken and bad."

 

[Thermal]

Okay - but while the focus would be faith - there is and never has been freedom to go sin?

Sure there is and always was, right from Adam and Eve.

BTW, I actually remain unaware of what faith in Christ means....as in, I'm not sure that it is possible.

As it was taught to me, faith in Jesus as being son of God and resurrected and all was unimportant, and indeed besides the point. The gig was that faith in his teachings (as coming from The Man) would alter how you lived. It didn't matter if you believed in the resurrection and all that happy horse ◊◊◊◊, as long as you lived by the code of Do unto Others, yada yada yada.

 

[pgwenthold]

Sure there is and always was, right from Adam and Eve.

As it was taught to me, faith in Jesus as being son of God and resurrected and all was unimportant, and indeed besides the point. The gig was that faith in his teachings (as coming from The Man) would alter how you lived. It didn't matter if you believed in the resurrection and all that happy horse ◊◊◊◊, as long as you lived by the code of Do unto Others, yada yada yada.

This is all to the point of pointless (just as was the stuff earlier about how weren't "forgiven" but were "wiped away"). This is just dueling denominational doctrine. You can find some churches that say X, some say Y. Obviously, there is not clear answer, so debating it is a waste of time.

As PZ Myers notes, theology is basically the Emperor's New Clothes. There's no "there" to it, it's just about what people decide sounds good based on one's objectives.

God is unknown (even the existence of such is unknown, much less properties) and is ultimately unknowable (especially if imposing omni properties). Anyone who pretends to "know" how it works is deluded.

 

[Thermal]

This is all to the point of pointless (just as was the stuff earlier about how weren't "forgiven" but were "wiped away"). This is just dueling denominational doctrine. You can find some churches that say X, some say Y. Obviously, there is not clear answer, so debating it is a waste of time.

As PZ Myers notes, theology is basically the Emperor's New Clothes. There's no "there" to it, it's just about what people decide sounds good based on one's objectives.

God is unknown (even the existence of such is unknown, much less properties) and is ultimately unknowable (especially if imposing omni properties). Anyone who pretends to "know" how it works is deluded.

Oh, I'm not lobbying it. Poem asked what "faith in Christ" was supposed to mean, and I recounted as it was beat over my skull. The issue of the "way you live" was what faith was all about, not just verbal claiming.

 

[acbytesla]

You have to wonder, as well, why this god would go to all the trouble of crafting these laws, only to jettison them as apparently unimportant at a later date. Was he just trying to make life difficult for a bunch of goatherders?

Exactly.

There are over 45,000 different Christian denominations worldwide with their own interpretations. Not only to what scripture means, but what is scripture.

How do we know what are God's laws? Whose writings should we accept as inspired by God? What if they're not? What if we're following the wrong laws? The whole concept of planting a flag in the ground and declaring these are God's words and laws and they are inerrant is absurd to me.

How do we or could we know with any confidence?

Why should anyone accept the words of Paul as divine inspiration? Or that the Ancient Greek words of some anonymous writer were actually the words of Jesus? A man who lived 30 to 60 years earlier.

Why haven't we decided that the words of Shakespeare, Socrates or Einstein were divinely inspired instead?

Hey ,I like a lot of the teachings of Jesus as much or more than the average Christian. I wish more people treated others the way the character Jesus supposedly did. But do we really know those teachings were his?

Why should any of us believe the Jesus mythology and not the Mohammed or the Vishnu mythology, etc, etc, etc?

 

[Poem]

Actually, no, I really don't see "humanity" as "broken and bad." But that doesn't mean that everything is "just fine."

Your doctor analogy fails. I get regular checkups with the doctor, occasionally go in for something acute, but generally, just regular checkups. And not because I am "broken" but because I want to monitor my health.
Same with my cars. My cars go in for regular checkups. That doesn't mean they are broken. In fact, most of the time, they report is that they are, indeed, "just fine." In fact, at our last checkup, our 2017 CRV was assessed as "doing great."

I do not accept the assertion that humanity is "broken and bad"

Not everything for everyone is just fine, but that's a far cry from "broken and bad."

It wasn't my analogy.

The degree to which humanity is broken will of course be subjective and relative.

 

[Poem]

There is some disagreement here.

Yes, the book predicts the concept of the temple falling, but it also gets some details wrong.
The whole "not one stone will be left standing" thing, for example, didn't happen, and if it had been written after, they would have known that.

Source?