Are gods insignificant unless they do something?

[Zzyzx]

.
What is the significance of gods unless they do or have done something?

What have your favorite gods done lately (or ever)?

How do you know what they do or did? Did someone tell you? Read a book? Have a psychic experience? Use your imagination?

Is there any verifiable evidence that any of the thousands of proposed 'gods' has ever done anything?

Before humans learned about cause-and-effect in terrestrial matters, they credited ‘gods’ with being responsible for rain, flood, drought, storms, insect plagues, diseases, crop failures, thunder, darkening of the sun or moon, etc, etc. With those accounted for without need for ‘gods’, what is left for the ‘gods’ to do in respect to humans?

[Clownboat]

Jesus was rejected by those who knew him best in his home town of Nazareth. Those who knew him rejected him as being a Mesiah.

And according to the same stories, those who reject him as the Messiah do so to their own destruction.

Can we not leave the scare tactics to terrorists? Try logic and reaon.

Again, those who knew him best and for the longest rejected him. This shows us that his might acts did not establish beyond doubt that he was a god like you have claimed.

So then the question becomes; at that point, what more can you do?

You show that you are speaking the truth of course.

Second, when you say "his might" (mighty acts/miracles) did not establish beyond doubt that Jesus was god...you are presupposing the fact that such acts were demonstrated.

Incorrect. I was responding to this claim:
'"that His mighty acts establish beyond the shadow of a doubt that He is the only True and living God is a matter of fact."
Obviously, his mighty acts did not do such a thing.

[JehovahsWitness]

WAS JESUS A FALSE PROPHET

The Mosaic Law instructed the Jews to reject anyone claiming to be a Prophet who did not come in the name of their God (YHWH) and/or whose words were subsequently proven to be go unfulfilled. Could it be said that those that rejected Jesus did so on legitimate claims that he (Jesus) had thus proven himself to be a "false prophet".

Jesus constantly drew attention to scripture and could never be accused of attempting to turn he people away from Yahweh/Jehovah the God of Hebrew scripture to any foreign god (compare John 17:17) . What about false claims? When he read in the synagogue of Nazareth, he applied the passage of Isaiah 61:1 2a to himself and was effectively announcing a period of great blessings for the people through him.



What effect did such a declaration have on the audience? Luke reports " ... they all began to give favorable witness about him and to be amazed at the gracious words coming out of his mouth" (Luke 4: 22 NWT). So , far from being outraged or declaring he had transgressed scripture, those in attendance were impressed by Jesus eloquence. While they evidently wondered how a local man, who had not attended the higher schools of education came about such linguistic abilities, there is not the slightest suggestion that anyone in attendance challenged him as a false prophet. In any case, Hebrew law reasonably demanded that time would be needed to establish the veracity of any Prophetic declaration.


WERE JESUS WORDS PROVEN FALSE?

The bible narrative clearly indicate that Jesus subsequent ministry brought great blessings to the nation. Both physically in terms of countless miracles and spiritually in terms of biblical enlightenment. The scriptures record the reaction of many to Jesus works ...

MARK 2:12

... This amazed everyone and they praised God, saying, "We have never seen anything like this!"

MATTHEW 9:8

But when the crowds saw this, they were awestruck, and glorified God, who had given such authority to men.

LUKE 7:16
Now fear seized them all, and they began to glorify God, saying: “A great prophet has been raised up among us,” and, “God has turned his attention to his people.”.

CONCLUSION: The is nothing in the biblical text to suggest Jesus opponents had legitimate cause to reject his propheetic declaration at Nazareth, if some did so it was neither because anyone had proven them false nor because they were offended by the suggestion he was in fact a Prophet.




RELATED POSTS

Was Jesus a fraud?
viewtopic.php?p=1019934#p1019934

[JehovahsWitness]

Any prophet [...] would surely not be rejected if they could show that they spoke the truth.

One would like to imagine this to be the case. However, human history is full of people rejecting true and accurate information. Paradoxically even in the face of evident demonstration, some people will choose not to revise their position. It seems that whether we accept somthing as true is often influenced by our focus, motives and desires.

MARK 6:4
But Jesus said to them: “A prophet is not without honor except in his home territory and among his relatives and in his own house.”

When Jesus stated the above he was expressjng a biblical truth. While not a direct quotation, Hebrew Scripture is full examples of Prophets being rejected by their countryment, and in the case of Jeremiah, by their own townsmen. Interestingly in the case of Jeremiah, even when his dire prediction of the destruction of Jerusalem came true, the remnant of survivors still rejected his further instructions. Despite countless miracles and impecible credentials Jesus opponents, driven not by a genuine desire for truth but by selfish agenda to discredit him, demanded more, and more. When he cured a man born blind, they reprimanded him for doing so on the Sabbath, when he raised a man from the dead, (the ultimate demonstration of divine backing) Jesus enemies sought to kill both him and to destroy the evidence by trying to kill the recently resurrected man. when he healed a paraletic before their very eyes they berated the cured man for carrying his cot!

CONCLUSION Many recognised Jesus as a great prophet. While the law mandated false Prophtes be rejected, those that rejected Jesus had no legitimate cause to do so. Jesus words at Mark 6:4 pointed out a scriptural reality that Prophets tend to be ill received by their own kinsmen. Not necessarily because of falsehoods but because familiarity breeds a contempt that can cloud unbias judgement.

[Willum]

[Replying to JehovahsWitness in post #42]

Jesus constantly drew attention to scripture and could never be accused of attempting to turn he people away from Yahweh/Jehovah the God of Hebrew scripture to any foreign god (compare John 17:17).

Obviously, Jesus, like many of his followers today, cherry-picked scripture to support his agenda.
Which seemed almost universally to support Rome's strategic goals; ruler-ship, taxes, and domestic tranquility.
These are the ONLY real world take-aways from Jesus' preaching.
All other take-aways deal with things that can't be guessed at, shown or proven.

However, human history is full of people rejecting true and accurate information.

Can you give any good examples that, say, lasted more than 200 years? (Essentially how long it would take the information to propagate, before the telephone.)

I can think of a few. That the earth was flat, necessary for people to continue to believe in God.
The curse of Ham, promoting slavery, thanks to God.
The light from the Moon and stars.
People still deny evolution, so they can continue believing in talking snakes, magic fruit and perpetual sin!
Treating women like chattels.
Geocentricity.

It is amazing, the events where people reject the truth are those where a strog belief in Judaism or Christianity is involved.
I can't help but see the trend.

[Willum]

[Replying to We_Are_VENOM in post #40]

Hey, if you are not going to read or acknowledge other people's posts, what is the good of debate?
Your statements have had their position refuted as early as two or three posts ahead of them.

Please do us the courtesy of reading a few posts ahead before interjecting things that are rendered baseless earlier.

[Willum]

[Replying to JehovahsWitness in post #32]

the God of Abraham has proven to be mightier than all the myriads of pagan/ tribal gods or their dead Greek or Roman cousins

I am sorry, how does the predominance of one imaginary thing over another prove something?
Does this mean Superman is ascendant?

And what about Pagan deity's resurgence? Surely something false wouldn't be coming back, even while Christianity flags?

Still another issue, as if there weren't enough, is essentially every Abrahamist, every Judaist, every Christian and every sect of all of them WORSHIP A DIFFERENT GOD.
So only one of them could possibly not be 'pagan,' as it were.

This goes straight down to the personal level. EveryONE believes their personal version of God is right, regardless of the religion they belong to.
All in all, your observation does not have much depth for discussion.

[JehovahsWitness]

[Replying to JehovahsWitness in post #42]

Jesus constantly drew attention to scripture and could never be accused of attempting to turn he people away from Yahweh/Jehovah the God of Hebrew scripture to any foreign god (compare John 17:17).

Obviously, Jesus, [....] cherry-picked scripture to support his agenda.

Perhaps you would like to provide an example with a reference, of his doing this and explain how your example demonstrates him "cherry picking"



JW

CHERRY-PICKING suppressing evidence, or the fallacy of incomplete evidence is the act of pointing to individual cases or data that seem to confirm a particular position while ignoring a significant portion of related and similar cases or data that may contradict that position.


source: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cherry_ ... 0fallacies.

RELATED POSTS

Why do Christians wear MIXED FABRICS and eat SEAFOOD yet prohibit homosexual acts ?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 72#p996772

Do Christians cherry-pick "old testament" laws?
viewtopic.php?p=1055839#p1055839

Did Jesus "cherry-pick" the Torah?
viewtopic.php?p=1020092#p1020092

What does the bible say about homosexuality?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 94#p995694

[Willum]

[Replying to JehovahsWitness in post #47]

Perhaps you would like to provide an example with a reference, of his doing this and explain how your example demonstrates him "cherry picking"

Perhaps you could give an indication that you have read the book you claim to hold as the ultimate truth.
I do not like being relied on by believers to demonstrate their book. You SHOULD know it.
First of all, all Jesus' quotes are hearsay. Magically remembered by his followers after he disappeared.

But that, though completely discrediting, is not what you asked.

Cherry-picks to defy the Torah:

You have heard that it was said, ‘Eye for eye, and tooth for tooth.’ But I tell you, do not resist an evil person. If anyone slaps you on the right cheek, turn to them the other cheek also. And if anyone wants to sue you and take your shirt, hand over your coat as well. If anyone forces you to go one mile, go with them two miles. Give to the one who asks you, and do not turn away from the one who wants to borrow from you.

“You have heard that it was said, ‘Love your neighbor and hate your enemy.’ But I tell you, love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you, that you may be children of your Father in heaven.

I think you will acknowledge defying the Torah is cherry-picking. Which was your point, wasn't it? Drawing people away from Yahweh?

Jesus rarely gives more than one liners, without context, the definition of cherry-picking and cherry picking a non-sequitur, is harder, because you will simply deny they are non-sequitur. But here you are:

“You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall not commit adultery’; but I say to you that everyone who looks at a woman with lust for her has already committed adultery with her in his heart. If your right eye makes you stumble, tear it out and throw it from you; for it is better for you to lose one of the parts of your body, than for your whole body to be thrown into hell. If your right hand makes you stumble, cut it off and throw it from you; for it is better for you to lose one of the parts of your body, than for your whole body to go into hell. (Matt. 5:27-30)

Clearly Jesus cherry-picked an associated Toratic quote to create a straw-man for adultery.

These are a few examples. Keep in mind, it requires more than your opinion to say these aren't true.

[JehovahsWitness]

DID JESUS CHEERY-PICK SCRIPTURE?

No Jesus did not "cherry-pick" scripture and he certainly did not defy or oppose it; what he did during the famous sermon on the mount was explain Torah. The context* indicates he was contrasting divine truth with Rabbinic tradition ("You have heard it said ...." ) - compare Mat 5:20

MATTHEW 5:20

I say to you that if your righteousness does not surpass that of the scribes and the Pharisees,+ you will by no means enter into the Kingdom of the heavens.

Clearly Jesus was not taking issue with the TORAH but with pharisaical interpretation of Torah.

* When Jesus previously quoted from the Hebrew Scriptures, he said: “It is written.” (Matthew 4:4, 7, 10) But six times in the Sermon on the Mount, he instead says: “It was said.” (Matthew 5:21, 27, 31, 33, 38, 43)

EYE FOR EYE : THE RABBINIC WAY

When referred to what his audience had heard said, Jesus was in fact referencing Rabbinic tradition that focused on the quest for personal vengeance. This undermined the principles upon which the Torah was based, namely the need to defer to divine justice.

HATE YOUR ENEMY

Jesus was not quoting from the Torah when he pointed out some said "... hate your enemy."? There he was refering to Jewish oral tradition. No Mosaic law said, “Hate your enemy" that was the interpretation of the religious leaders of his time and a distortion of the spirit of the law.

CONCLUSION Rather than defying the law Jesus sermon on the mount exposed false teachers who distorted and undermined the beauty of the written law with their faulty interpretations and unscriptural traditions. For example "a certificates of divorce" should never have been authorized on flimsy grounds* (see Malachi 2:13-16) that murder stems from prolonged hatred, adultery from lust. In short, Jesus wasn't cherry-picking he was explaining the principles upon which the written law was based.



JW

To learn more please go to other posts related to ...

THE LAW, BLOOD SACRIFICE and ...RANSOM

[Willum]

[Replying to JehovahsWitness in post #49]

I can read the Bible and have.

I therefore disagree with your opinion in light of the more obvious language of the Bible.
When it comes to your interpretation, vs what I can read on what seems very obvious, why should I even consider your personal apologetics?

I shouldn't.

Therefore Jesus cherry-picked and drew incorrect conclusions, just as his followers continue to do in that tradition, as anyone can plainly read.

Do you care to take up any of the other challenges I put before you?