Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

A rather controversial discussion in History. But why not? Let's hear your thoughts. Besides you already had fun with my other Conquerors thread.

Originally posted by WrathfulDwarf
A rather controversial discussion in History. But why not? Let's hear your thoughts. Besides you already had fun with my other Conquerors thread.

judas

Benny Arnold :P

Since not only is he a famous traitor, but the last battle he was in as a revolutionary he actually kept us from losing... by disobeying orders repeatedly, thankfully those issued by an incompetent commander and managed to save the day. It was just getting punished for it that irked him enough to make him betray us D:

Ephialtes....I would have loved to see what Leonidas and the rest of the Greeks could have done if he hadn't told the Persians about the pass.

judas iscariot wasn't necessarily a traitor. read borges' "the three faces of judas" for more details.

Ptolemy Soter, Perdiccas, Lysimachus, Antigonus, Cassander and Seleucus, Alexander's most trusted generals, some or maybe even all of whom almost certainly had a role in his death.

The commonly accepted story is that he was poisoned by those closest to him. While it can never be proved who was or wasn't involved, they all stood to gain a lot, and it's highly unlikely that those actively involved would've been able to keep their plans secret from the rest, therefore they're almost certainly all responsible to some degree.

Judas or Benedict.

Originally posted by Lord Coal
Ptolemy Soter, Perdiccas, Lysimachus, Antigonus, Cassander and Seleucus, Alexander's most trusted generals, some or maybe even all of whom almost certainly had a role in his death.

The commonly accepted story is that he was poisoned by those closest to him. While it can never be proved who was or wasn't involved, they all stood to gain a lot, and it's highly unlikely that those actively involved would've been able to keep their plans secret from the rest, therefore they're almost certainly all responsible to some degree.

Very good! That's a great contribution to the thread.

Originally posted by WrathfulDwarf
Very good! That's a great contribution to the thread.

Why, thank you good sir.

I think what makes the betrayal of Alexander's generals even more despicable was that their collective motive was pure greed. All of them put together couldn't have been the leader history remembers Alexander as being, so they were serving only their own purposes.

At least Marcus Junius Brutus had a respectable motive.

TBH I'm shocked that Ptolemy I Soter isn't on the poll but a lots of nobodies are. Is there no justice in the world

Benedict Arnold, by far.

Who the fvck's Benedict Arnold?

Roger Casement?

William Joyce?

Otto Ville Kuusinen?

Alcibiades?

and Philippe Petain?

Benny Arnold.

Good Mr. Arnold

Originally posted by Lord Coal
Who the fvck's Benedict Arnold?

Roger Casement?

William Joyce?

Otto Ville Kuusinen?

Alcibiades?

and Philippe Petain?

Wikipedia is your friend... It has all the answers you need and more, which makes me wonder why the hell Otto Ville Kuusinen is on the list. Never heard of him before today and when reading up I must say didn't sound like a traitor to me, just somebody who lost a civil war and fled to a neighboring country...

Anyways as for the greatest traitor my vote goes to Brutus.

Because we know he was a traitor, we know he helped kill and plan Caesar, and this isn't disputed. Unlike with Judas where it is very possible that he was actually ordered to kill Jesus instead of doing it because he wanted to. Or Alexander his generals, where we simply have no idea if they really had anything to do with his death in the first place.

I'd vote for Alcibiades. That little turd double crossed everyone at least once or twice all for purely selfish reasons. That being said, he really must have had the gift for gab.

Originally posted by Lord Coal
I think what makes the betrayal of Alexander's generals even more despicable was that their collective motive was pure greed. All of them put together couldn't have been the leader history remembers Alexander as being, so they were serving only their own purposes.

I see your point, but being as history is written by imperfect humans, one also has to wonder if their motivations was not one born out of malice, hurt feelings or self preservation.

Alexander often acted irrationally. He killed the most loyal soldier to Macedonia and one of his most trusted friends (cleitus the black) out of rage. He had systematically dismissed the Macedonia army and was replacing them with persian recruits. More and more persian officers were making their way up the ranks replacing Macedonian officers. The Macedonian soldiers were at their wits end ofter a long campaign which still had no end in site.

I don't think that Alexander's death is a clear cut issue. No one knows really who killed him. So why blame all his generals or cast aspersions to what their motivations were?

I see your point. Alexander was certainly unpredictable, and understandably his generals my well have been worried for their respective futures, but this doesn't automatically justify their course of actions.

Remember there were a number of previous attempts on Alexander's life, and although there is no clear cut evidence to say for certain sure how, or why, Alexander died, his generals, who were supposedly his closest friends, didn't help the situation.

It's highly probable that Ptolemy was Alexander's half brother, and most of the others had grown up with, or at least around, him, and were, as I say, supposedly his closest friends. This was not just a betrayal of a king, a talented general and the son of a God (People back then believed that kind of shit), it was the betrayal of a close friend and, for Ptolemy, a brother.

It didn't stop there. Remember their squabbling? If they'd sat down and decided who they were going to follow as Alexander's successor, or allowed Alexander's unborn son to succeed (With the help of a regent, for obvious reasons), then over a decade of hard work might not have been undone.

They didn't just betray him, but his memory, his son, his empire, their Macedon, their deities, and ultimately themselves....

Judas ?

I thought he betrayed Jesus out of both fear and wishing that Jesus would (basically) destroy the opposition. He wanted aggressive tactics while Jesus wanted passive.

Originally posted by Lord Coal
I see your point. Alexander was certainly unpredictable, and understandably his generals my well have been worried for their respective futures, but this doesn't automatically justify their course of actions.

Remember there were a number of previous attempts on Alexander's life, and although there is no clear cut evidence to say for certain sure how, or why, Alexander died, his generals, who were supposedly his closest friends, didn't help the situation.

It's highly probable that Ptolemy was Alexander's half brother, and most of the others had grown up with, or at least around, him, and were, as I say, supposedly his closest friends. This was not just a betrayal of a king, a talented general and the son of a God (People back then believed that kind of shit), it was the betrayal of a close friend and, for Ptolemy, a brother.

It didn't stop there. Remember their squabbling? If they'd sat down and decided who they were going to follow as Alexander's successor, or allowed Alexander's unborn son to succeed (With the help of a regent, for obvious reasons), then over a decade of hard work might not have been undone.

They didn't just betray him, but his memory, his son, his empire, their Macedon, their deities, and ultimately themselves....

That is if they killed him, which I have still never seen evidence off. The events leading up to Alexander his death are unclear. He could have just as easily died a natural death...

Also the squabbling was a natural event. Alexander had no clear heir for as far as I can remember and a son that wasn't born would surely not be fit to rule, besides who would be regent? That alone could easily lead to a huge ass war...

other...

judas traded eternal glory for eternal hellfire just so the divinity of christ could be proved. he definitely doesn't belong.

alcibiades ftw.

I chose "other". I think that Bessus, who later became "Artaxerxes", was a very Huge Traitor, for killing the The Great King Darius lll of Persia, after the Persian army had been defeated by Alexander The Great.

Originally posted by Penelope
I chose "other". I think that Bessus, who later became "Artaxerxes", was a very Huge Traitor, for killing the The Great King Darius lll of Persia, after the Persian army had been defeated by Alexander The Great.

Really him? The greatest traitor?

I would consider more of a desperate man trying to save what little he could of Persia.. Not really the greatest traitor ever.

Originally posted by Fishy
Really him? The greatest traitor?

I would consider more of a desperate man trying to save what little he could of Persia.. Not really the greatest traitor ever.

Or...just some desperate man who wanted to be more powerful than he already was.

Originally posted by Penelope
Or...just some desperate man who wanted to be more powerful than he already was.

Still he betrayed a dying country.... Nothing to spectacular if you ask me. But that's just me.

Originally posted by Fishy
Still he betrayed a dying country.... Nothing to spectacular if you ask me. But that's just me.

True. He did betray a dying Empire. Had Darius lll not been assissinated, it probably would've taken some of the "pressure" off of Alexander's subjagation of Asia. Maybe even have saved some lives.

SANTA ANNA!!!!

As a Norwegian, I have to mention Vidkun Quisling. He was Norwegian politican, supporting Hitler during World War II. He held the office of Minister President in occupied Norway from February 1942 to the end of World War II, while the elected social democratic cabinet of Johan Nygaardsvold was exiled in London. Quisling forces were formed in most occupied European countries. They were used by the Axis to control the local population and free German forces for major military operations against Allies. However, as they were unpopular, German forces had to stay behind anyway. After the war Quisling was tried for high treason and subsequently executed by firing squad. His surname has become an eponym for "traitor", especially a collaborationist.(..)

A part of Norwegian history I'm not very proud of.

Regards, Yvonne

Who was that lady who let former nazi's hide in her country? I forget..

Originally posted by yvonnekarate
As a Norwegian, I have to mention Vidkun Quisling. He was Norwegian politican, supporting Hitler during World War II. He held the office of Minister President in occupied Norway from February 1942 to the end of World War II, while the elected social democratic cabinet of Johan Nygaardsvold was exiled in London. Quisling forces were formed in most occupied European countries. They were used by the Axis to control the local population and free German forces for major military operations against Allies. However, as they were unpopular, German forces had to stay behind anyway. After the war Quisling was tried for high treason and subsequently executed by firing squad. His surname has become an eponym for "traitor", especially a collaborationist.(..)

A part of Norwegian history I'm not very proud of.

Regards, Yvonne

Every country had people like that, the idea's of Nazi's were popular especially in Aryan country's. There were people in all conquered country's that supported the Nazi's, they were usually put in high places and given important titles that had no real meaning as they had to listen to Hitler anyway. As much as it sucks, it's hardly something to feel really bad about. It just happens in wars, especially wars fought on idealistic grounds.

perhaps not the greatest traitor but certainly deserves mention: Andronikos Doukas (Adronicus Ducas). he deserted the emperor romanus iv diogenese in the pivotal battle of manzikert. while not the sole reason the byzantines lost the battle, one has to seriously question whether romanus could have prevailed if ducas didn't desert him and later stage a coup, as ducas was in command of a sizable force that was responsible for covering the byzantine army in the event of retreat. without this force the emperor was captured and the army routed.

the results of the battle allowed the seljuk turks permanent residence in anatolia. because the heartland of the byzantine empire was overrun, a later emperor, alexius I comnenus, appealed to the western states for aid. the direct result of this eppeal were the crusades.

further down the line, the byzantine military was never again capable of holding back islamic advance following that battle. again the result of which is centuries of transcontinental fighting between western european states and islamic states.

needleess to say we can feel the effects of these events every day of our lives today.

Do people honestly consider Benedict Arnold one of the greatest traitors throughout history?

I mean, what he did doesn't even compare to a lot of the other stuff here - he didn't even succeed in his betrayal. Or did you just pick him because you didn't know who any of the others were?

some other nominees that should be mentioned who are not are Bill clinton-he sold miissle secrets to the chinese.
dick nixon-no need to mention his autrocities.
FDR-knew the japenese would bomb pearl harbour and allowed it to happen
George Bush jr-same thing with 9-11.

What is Ephialtes doing on that list ? We almost know nothing from him, so it's a bit unfair to say he's a traitor.

Maybe he had good reason to hate the Spartans. Maybe the Persians made him tell it. Who knows ?

Originally posted by Kid Kurdy
What is Ephialtes doing on that list ? We almost know nothing from him, so it's a bit unfair to say he's a traitor.

Maybe he had good reason to hate the Spartans. Maybe the Persians made him tell it. Who knows ?

The same could be said for Judas, we know what we know and we should base our opinion on that.

judas
Because,I only heard about he.

Ephiatles the Spartans couldve won

and Aryan countries are what???

The traitor that told Xerxes of a Path the Spartans would take to surround the Spartans and defeat them once and for all.

Lu Bu. He betrayed and kill both of his adopted fathers.

I smile when I see Benedict Arnold's name on a list full of traitors. The flippin' guy won the Revolutionary war for America, he should be revered, not matter what he did during the later parts of the war.

Judas Judas Judas!

I've never even heard of a single name on that poll, WD. hanuts

... you've never heard of Judas?

Judas Priest...that's about it.

Judas, no contest.

Judas....no, wait, that doesn't make sense for two reasons, a) he but betrayed one man, and did it for good solid reasons and b) that ****er even wanted Judas to betray him...you Christians are odd, really.

Its that ***** Brutus....

Is Judas even real?

I say Quisling.

Originally posted by Bardock42
you Christians are odd, really.

Thank you! I try. awesome

Originally posted by Kelly_Bean
Thank you! I try. awesome

So, you're a christian and you don't know Judas Iscariot?

-AC

Originally posted by manorastroman
judas traded eternal glory for eternal hellfire just so the divinity of christ could be proved. he definitely doesn't belong.

alcibiades ftw.

Why doesn't Judas belong? Anyway you look at it, he betrayed Christ.

Originally posted by Robtard
Exactly, he had no choice but to do so, according to Christian superstition, Jesus had to die for everyones' sins in order for humanity to be saved.

With that in mind, Judas would be the far greater martyr of the two. Jesus willingly died knowing he would come back and then go to Heaven. Judas willingly did what he did for all humanity, knowing he would burn in the lowest pit of hell for all eternity; that is the far greater sacrifice.

Christians should really worship Judas or at least include him in their daily prays.

Jesus didn't have to die on the cross for our sins. It just so happens that he forgave of us of all of our sins as he died on the cross. This is just what i believe. It is very possible that Calvinism is right and we are all born predestined for either Heaven or Hell but i feel that we all have a chance for salvation. Judas betrayed his Christ for many reasons. I have read the Bible three times and i've never read that he betrayed Christ to save humanity.

... he didn't. He didn't betray Christ thinking "I'm doing this for humanity..", He betrayed him thinking "I'm getting paid. **** Christ."

Originally posted by NonSensi-Klown
... he didn't. He didn't betray Christ thinking "I'm doing this for humanity..", He betrayed him thinking "I'm getting paid. **** Christ." Exactly, a good, hard working man, that guy.

And, though not consciously, enabled that Jesus fellow to rid us of all our sins. Swell guy.

I also heard he grew hydroponic shit with Jesus' brother, Craig.

I wouldn't necessarily count selling some dude out as hardworking, considering it's mostly just like... words and stuff. But then again, I think that undereducated factory workers should get paid more than CEO's. So... meh.

Originally posted by NonSensi-Klown
I wouldn't necessarily count selling some dude out as hardworking, considering it's mostly just like... words and stuff. But then again, I think that undereducated factory workers should get paid more than CEO's. So... meh. That's cause you are black...


Silly idea about factory workers you have there, though.

Why isnt Micheal Bay on this list...?

Originally posted by Bardock42
That's cause you are black...


Silly idea about factory workers you have there, though.

Meh. I just feel that if you're risking losing limbs and and possibly dying, and you work in an eviroment that is incredibly hazerdous... you should get paid a lot more then some fat ****er who sits around surfing Myspace a quarter of the time and chilling out in an AC'd meeting room for half the time, and writing a report or two the remaining quarter.

Originally posted by NonSensi-Klown
Meh. I just feel that if you're risking losing limbs and and possibly dying, and you work in an eviroment that is incredibly hazerdous... you should get paid a lot more then some fat ****er who sits around surfing Myspace a quarter of the time and chilling out in an AC'd meeting room for half the time, and writing a report or two the remaining quarter.

I guess you'd rather have people paid by the risk they take or how little you'd like to have their job, while I prefer that people get paid by the money they are able to raise (or the worth of their work). Which, I guess is fair enough, just, I have no idea how your idea would work (except for not).

I don't think the two are mutually exclusive. If there is danger involved then the value of their work will increase because the incentive needed for the employer to acquire the worker's services will be greater. It isn't a direct cause, but the wage/salary would increase nonetheless.

Originally posted by Red Nemesis
I don't think the two are mutually exclusive. If there is danger involved then the value of their work will increase because the incentive needed for the employer to acquire the worker's services will be greater. It isn't a direct cause, but the wage/salary would increase nonetheless. Yeah, it is certainly included in the evaluation of the "worth" of the work in a capitalist system.

Originally posted by Bardock42
I guess you'd rather have people paid by the risk they take or how little you'd like to have their job, while I prefer that people get paid by the money they are able to raise (or the worth of their work). Which, I guess is fair enough, just, I have no idea how your idea would work (except for not).

I don't think it would work, ot at least not well. It's mroe just a moral belief on my part, that your reward should be based on how much actual work you are doing. But yeah that wouldn't work out very well in a real life situation.

Originally posted by ragesRemorse
Jesus didn't have to die on the cross for our sins. It just so happens that he forgave of us of all of our sins as he died on the cross. This is just what i believe. It is very possible that Calvinism is right and we are all born predestined for either Heaven or Hell but i feel that we all have a chance for salvation. Judas betrayed his Christ for many reasons. I have read the Bible three times and i've never read that he betrayed Christ to save humanity.

Jesus' death (blood) is what paid for our sins, according to Christian superstition. So yeah, he had to die, he was litterally born to die for us. (and rise again, you know, that godhood business)

He did it for the 30 pieces of silver, still, he was destined to do it, as Jesus had to die for us. So in essence, he is the bigger martyr. Pray for Judas.

Alcibiades and Brutus. One was arguably one of the greatest deceivers in world history, and the other killed his former best friend and proxy father.

The list should really include 'The Jews', if you don't believe me, watch Gibson's Jesus flick.

Originally posted by Robtard
Jesus' death (blood) is what paid for our sins, according to Christian superstition. So yeah, he had to die, he was litterally born to die for us. (and rise again, you know, that godhood business)

He did it for the 30 pieces of silver, still, he was destined to do it, as Jesus had to die for us. So in essence, he is the bigger martyr. Pray for Judas. I'm not sure that's right. Technically you could say he was "destined" to do it, only because God and Jesus knew that he was going to do it already... but they know that about everyone. So, everyone is destined to something... that doesn't mean that they're good people or should be praised for doing it, though. And again, Judas wasn't doing it for mankind, in his heart he was just greedy. And by your logic, Satan himself should be praised since ultimately God knows what's going to happen, and Satan acts as a way to show that we (Christians) are faithful to God, meaning that his actions can be seen as a benefit to mankind, or at least the "faithful" ones.

At least, that's what they say.

Originally posted by NonSensi-Klown
I don't think it would work, ot at least not well. It's mroe just a moral belief on my part, that your reward should be based on how much actual work you are doing. But yeah that wouldn't work out very well in a real life situation.

I'd actually like you to clear this up. Are you saying that work should be defined as physical labor only? Intellectuals contribute just as much (if not more) than physical laborers do. It might be interesting, if not disastrous, to base payments as the amount of work as defined by physics, if only to see the economy collapse. (faster)

Intellectual labor in and of itself can not result in you losing limbs or dying from asbestos ten years later. To my knowledge, it is extremely rare to see someone have their arm chopped off on accident while typing a data report, for example.

Originally posted by Final Blaxican
Intellectual labor in and of itself can not result in you losing limbs or dying from asbestos ten years later. To my knowledge, it is extremely rare to see someone have their arm chopped off on accident while typing a data report, for example. Yeah, but most people can do physical labour, not everyone can do intellectual tasks.

Originally posted by Final Blaxican
I'm not sure that's right. Technically you could say he was "destined" to do it, only because God and Jesus knew that he was going to do it already... but they know that about everyone. So, everyone is destined to something... that doesn't mean that they're good people or should be praised for doing it, though. And again, Judas wasn't doing it for mankind, in his heart he was just greedy. And by your logic, Satan himself should be praised since ultimately God knows what's going to happen, and Satan acts as a way to show that we (Christians) are faithful to God, meaning that his actions can be seen as a benefit to mankind, or at least the "faithful" ones.

At least, that's what they say.

Still doesn't take away that Jesus had to die and Judas' actions were what lead (at least in part) to that. Judas is a hero, or at least should be. As a Christian, you should revere that man, his actions despite done from greed, are what allowed Jesus to die and save you.

The Satan bebacle is a another thing that gets me, God knew he would seek greatness before Satan was created (since he's God and without limits), yet God proceeds to create Satan and then punish him for doing essentially what he was made to do. God really is the prick in that story. As a Christian, you should really feel pity and have sympathy for Satan, dude got a raw-deal.

But that shouldn't matter. Again, I'm talking not from a realistic, productive point of view but a mortal one.

Just because Mr. Barely literate can wield a device designed to chop steal in half, doesn't mean that he should get paid less then the University Graduate who sits in an office all day typing reports, because Mr.Illerate has a much higher risk of dying doing his job... or getting maimed. I feel that the higher the risk involved the more rewards they should get. Getting less health care coverage and less pay for performing a job much more dangerous then an office worker is nonsenical.

Originally posted by Robtard
Still doesn't take away that Jesus had to die and Judas' actions were what lead (at least in part) to that. Judas is a hero, or at least should be. You should revere that Man, as a Christian, his actions allowed Jesus to die and save you.

The Satan bebacle is a another thing that gets me, God knew he would seek greatness before Satan was created (since he's God and without limits), yet God proceeds tp create Satan and then punish him for doing essentially what he was made to do. God really is the prick in that story. As a Christian, you should really feel pity and have sympathy for Satan, dude got a raw-deal.

Or maybe I should just cover my ears, pass you off as a test to my faith, and continue to revel in my ignorance?

Heathen.

Originally posted by Final Blaxican
Or maybe I should just cover my ears, pass you off as a test to my faith, and continue to revel in my ignorance?

Heathen.

Very Christian of you.

Yeah, guess so.

i think you are all missing the main point. its all about intentions. some christian doctrines believe that judas new the role that god had in mind for him and betrayed jesus to bring about a prophecy. in this case, judas is a martyr, arguably an even bigger one that jesus.

however, if judas simply betrayed jesus for thirty pieces of silver because of greed, his intentions were purely selfish. there would be nothing to suggest that he was acting in the name of a higher power or that he was intentionally acting for the good of mankind.

besides, you're all missing the BIG one. eve betraying god's trust and eating the forbidden apple. downfall of man right there... and yes, i know it was catalyzed by a woman. eve puts us all females to shame.

i, for one, don't put so much emphasis on literal interpretations of the bible.

The Biggest Traitors in History!

My cookies, I mean one second their in my mouth and the next their in the can.... treasonous dog cookies!!!

Originally posted by Fallen
i think you are all missing the main point. its all about intentions. some christian doctrines believe that judas new the role that god had in mind for him and betrayed jesus to bring about a prophecy. in this case, judas is a martyr, arguably an even bigger one that jesus.

however, if judas simply betrayed jesus for thirty pieces of silver because of greed, his intentions were purely selfish. there would be nothing to suggest that he was acting in the name of a higher power or that he was intentionally acting for the good of mankind.

besides, you're all missing the BIG one. eve betraying god's trust and eating the forbidden apple. downfall of man right there... and yes, i know it was catalyzed by a woman. eve puts us all females to shame.

i, for one, don't put so much emphasis on literal interpretations of the bible.

If the Eve story is true, then it isn't really her fault either, God is to blame, for being a total ass.

Originally posted by Robtard
Jesus' death (blood) is what paid for our sins, according to Christian superstition. So yeah, he had to die, he was litterally born to die for us. (and rise again, you know, that godhood business)

He did it for the 30 pieces of silver, still, he was destined to do it, as Jesus had to die for us. So in essence, he is the bigger martyr. Pray for Judas.

Ever seen the Last Tempation of Christ? That movie deals with this idea directly... great film.

Originally posted by Blinky
Ever seen the Last Tempation of Christ? That movie deals with this idea directly... great film.

I did; that's why I said "The Jews" should be included on the list. I thought the film was terrible though.

Originally posted by Robtard
I thought the film was terrible though.

http://mr.troligt.com/leet/dawson-crying.jpg

Originally posted by Blinky


Calm down, I simply didn't like the movie, no need to take it personal.

so if eve and judas never had a choice, what does it say about the rest of us?


well, no, but it has no consciousness. they virtually have no personality or anything that would give it the ability to reason for itself. now, if you program the machine to have a personality and the ability to reason, that's when it begins to have a life of its own.


i personally don't think life is pre-destined or that anyone is destined to do anything. if jesus did exist and he was the son of god, i think god created jesus for a purpose, but i still maintain that it was jesus's decision to follow through or not. i say the same for eve and judas.

That's ridiculous.

God would have created Jesus to specifically carry out a purpose, not to see if he would, but to actually do it.

If anything, that was the one part of the plan that would be pre-destined. If God's experiment was to discover anything, it'd be to see how the world reacts to all of it.

If he created Jesus for a purpose, then that's what the purpose was, and he was always going to do it. God didn't create everyone else, just have a few people the ability of creation.

-AC

Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
That's ridiculous.

God would have created Jesus to specifically carry out a purpose, not to see if he would, but to actually do it.

If anything, that was the one part of the plan that would be pre-destined. If God's experiment was to discover anything, it'd be to see how the world reacts to all of it.

-AC

let me rephrase that, god may have created jesus with a certain intention, but how do we know that god didn't bestow jesus with the ability to decide on his own?

i just don't believe in destiny or prophecies.


If he created Jesus for a purpose, then that's what the purpose was, and he was always going to do it. God didn't create everyone else, just have a few people the ability of creation.


i don't quite understand that last part, the last sentence in particular.

Sorry, that was meant to say "Gave", not "Have".

God didn't actually create all of us, even if he does exist. He created something...and out of that, came people with the ability to create more people.

-AC

Originally posted by Fallen
so if eve and judas never had a choice, what does it say about the rest of us?


well, no, but it has no consciousness. they virtually have no personality or anything that would give it the ability to reason for itself. now, if you program the machine to have a personality and the ability to reason, that's when it begins to have a life of its own.


i personally don't think life is pre-destined or that anyone is destined to do anything. if jesus did exist and he was the son of god, i think god created jesus for a purpose, but i still maintain that it was jesus's decision to follow through or not. i say the same for eve and judas.

Judas could have possibly have had free will, though Jesus dieing for all of us had to happen, the betrayal, the coming of the Messiah etc. etc. etc. is all prophecy, so if not Judas, someone else would have had to betray Jesus, though Jesus knowing Judas was the betrayer before it happened, pretty much leads one to believe it was Judas' destiny, which was my original point. Dude got a raw deal.

Jesus is God and God is Jesus, according to Christian superstition, Jesus knew his purpose from the get go and set about to die to save everyone. There was no other possible course.

Eve on the other-hand, was created directly by God (the Adam's rib bit) and God would have known she was to disobey before her creation, as God is without limits. So she was created to disobey and wouldn't have had freewill.

Edit: I personally don't take the Bible at face value, I believe the stories are just stories used as a teaching instrument and that a man named Jesus did exist, but I don't think he was God incarnate and I also question what is said about him, as the NT was written long after his death. But we're debating from a Christian point of view that (what if) the Bible is indeed true.