The National Forum   Donate   Your Account   On Line Opinion   Forum   Blogs   Polling   About   
The Forum - On Line Opinion's article discussion area



Syndicate
RSS/XML


RSS 2.0

Main Articles General

Sign In      Register

The Forum > Article Comments > Barack Obama is not Jesus Christ > Comments

Barack Obama is not Jesus Christ : Comments

By John Passant, published 22/1/2009

Rudd’s election was marked by hope. But like HowRuddista here, President Barack Obama may end up as OBushama.

  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. 8
  10. All
David f

You ask 'Dear Runner,

'How do you know I am a man of sin and corruption?'
The simple answer to that is that Christ would not of freely given of His life if their were any righteous on earth. He was the righteous dying for the unrighteous. Your arrogance and deliberate misrepresenting of Christ confirms exactly what I have said about you. You might be a good person in your own eyes and possibly others.Unfortunately compared with Christ you, me and all others fail miserably. I suggest you find some righteousness other than your own. You certainly need it.
Posted by runner, Thursday, 22 January 2009 12:01:15 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I have my serious misgivings about Obama and he should be watched very closely. However, we can't completely rule out the possibility that he may be on our side.

It turns out that virtually all the left around the world, were wrong about JFK and RFK, thanks to the insidious influence wielded by phony US dissidents Noam Chomsky and Alexander Cockburn(1). Contrary to what Chomsky and Cockburn would have us believe, JFK intended to stand up to the US corporate elite. Specific examples include JFK's intention to withdraw the US from Vietnam, his refusal to invade Cuba and his actions against the profiteering of the US Steel Corporation.

That is why JFK was murdered. However Chomsky managed almost single-handedly to lead the left away from the trail that would have lead to the killers of JFK, RFK, Malcolm X and MLK.

The most charismatic and effective leaders of the 1960's, who could have turned the US away from the course which has since caused untold harm to humankind and the planet's ecology, were all murdered and yet Chomsky and Cockburn and other 'left gatekeepers' insist that they see nothing suspicious in this and that anyone who does is an irrational and paraonoid.

Similarly, since 2001 Chomsky and Cockburn have gone out of their way to attack the 9/11 Truth Movement and cover you the crime committed against the US people by Cheney, Bush, Rumsfeld, Rice et al on 11 September 2001 (see also "9/11 Truth" at http://forum.onlineopinion.com.au/thread.asp?discussion=2166&page=76 http://911oz.com http://911blogger.com http://ae911truth.org http://911truth.org etc.).

If it turns out that Obama, rather than being a pale imitation of Bush, acts resolutely against the corporate elites, let's do what we can to make sure that the latter don't do this time to Barack Obama what they did to JFK, RFK, MLK and Malcolm X, or, if they do, that they are made to pay the price.

---

1. See Barrie Zwicker's "The Shame of Noam Chomsky and the Left gatekeepers" at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BhrZ57XxYJU
Posted by daggett, Thursday, 22 January 2009 12:10:07 PM
Find out more about this user Visit this user's webpage Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Trav, extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. The onus is upon you.

Runner,

Do you wear sackcloth and exercise self-flagellation? Take cold showers throughout winter and fast for the entire period of lent?

You should, y'know. It'd make the picture I have of you complete.
Posted by bennie, Thursday, 22 January 2009 12:23:40 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Bennie, Jesus existence is no extraordinary claim, in fact it's one that only a handful of sensationalist contrarians reject. So I'll assume you're referring to my claim that Jesus rose from the dead.

And for that, there is some good evidence. Only you can answer the question of whether it's enough to satisfy your requirement of "extraordinary".

Everyone has their own apriori presuppositions regarding the existence of the supernatural, and those presuppositions have an effect on how anyone will respond to evidence presented to them about claims of the supernatural.

If you look at the bible and just assume for a starting point that it should be treated in a similar fashion to any other historical work- in that it's a collection of ancient documents which should be scrutinised using the same principles of historical enquiry as any other ancient collection of documents, you'll find a few interesting things. That is, just look at it with the skeptical eye of historical enquiry (any supernatural claims should be looked at with suspicion).

Now if we do that, a few things pop out. The first and most obvious thing is the timegap between the supposed events and the writing. The dates of writing are considered to be VERY close to the events, given their historical nature.

Following on from the dating, scholars use historical principles to determine what they think we can ascertain about the texts and the events they describe. Scholars vary greatly, but almost all scholars (Over 90%) accept the following four events as historical:

-Jesus was crucified

-The disciples believed that Jesus appeared to them after he died.

-Paul, previously a Christian persecutor, had an experience, after which he converted to Christianity.

-James, the brother of Jesus, who previously didnt believe, also believed he met the resurrected Jesus.

A 5th events is agreed to by 75% of all scholars:

- Jesus tomb was empty after his crucifixion.

In the absence of any strong apriori presuppositions against the possibility of the supernatural, I'd argue that Jesus rising from the dead is the most reasonable explanation for the above historical events
Posted by Trav, Thursday, 22 January 2009 12:54:00 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
Trav

"I'd argue that Jesus rising from the dead is the most reasonable explanation for the above historical events."

I can't see how it's possible that a physically dead body could move itself out of a sealed tomb. Being realistic, I'd say there would have to be a more mundane reason for this event. How about a friend of Jesus, who perhaps did not want to see his body desecrated in any way, moved it out of the tomb and buried it somewhere else? Maybe someone who had the wherewithal to do so like Joseph of Arimathea?

The resurrection of Jesus and its manifestation seems to be referring to some kind of ethereal or supernatural state of Jesus. The story about the transfiguration would seem to support this.
Posted by RobP, Thursday, 22 January 2009 1:20:35 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
I can't resist :) Dear DAvid F....

for one who seem to hold the view that Jesus was 'mythical' you seem to like quoting Him as an authority to support various arguments. :)

blessings.
Posted by BOAZ_David, Thursday, 22 January 2009 1:54:30 PM
Find out more about this user Recommend this comment for deletion Return to top of page Return to Forum Main Page Copy comment URL to clipboard
  1. Pages:
  2. 1
  3. Page 2
  4. 3
  5. 4
  6. 5
  7. 6
  8. 7
  9. 8
  10. All

About Us :: Search :: Discuss :: Feedback :: Legals :: Privacy