|
Replies: 96
| visibility 8630
|
Dynasty Maker [3484]
TigerPulse: 78%
34
|
Did Jesus believe he was god?
3
Mar 9, 2025, 9:46 AM
|
|
Based on this passage no.
Mark 10:17-18
17 As Jesus started on his way, a man ran up to him and fell on his knees before him. “Good teacher,” he asked, “what must I do to inherit eternal life?”
18 “Why do you call me good?” Jesus answered. “No one is good—except God alone.
This brings up another question. Did Jesus believe he was perfect?
|
|
|
|
 |
Orange Immortal [64356]
TigerPulse: 100%
60
Posts: 49034
Joined: 2000
|
The Bible is useless as a literal, or even clear explanation of God, Jesus, or
3
Mar 9, 2025, 1:34 PM
|
|
spiritual matters that are beyond the ability of mortal humans to grasp or understand. It is an example of a particular tradition that developed over time as men, often with the purest of intentions, attempted to make sense of it all.
So, due to the lack of clarity and consistency, people who start with a commitment to certain beliefs instead of starting with a blank slate open to all possibilities and then proceeding objectively, they inevitably make The Bible say what they want it to say to fit their beliefs.
In this case, they will have a very well thought out answer which, in their minds, explains why there is no contradiction.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dynasty Maker [3484]
TigerPulse: 78%
34
|
Re: The Bible is useless as a literal, or even clear explanation of God, Jesus, or
3
Mar 9, 2025, 4:02 PM
|
|
I don't know if I'd say it is useless regarding the historical Jesus.
We discussed this passage this morning in sunday school. It was all about the rich guy and his lack of faith and trust in god, all things the passage never really say but are just implied from like you say a commitment to certain beliefs.
But if you read as plain text, bring no presumptions to the table, Jesus literally says I am not good, only god is. He separates himself from god, and implies that he is not sinless.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Immortal [64356]
TigerPulse: 100%
60
Posts: 49034
Joined: 2000
|
Maybe, but there are contradictions in there about the historical Jesus.
3
Mar 9, 2025, 8:17 PM
|
|
But more importantly, the message is not clear without accepting someone else's interpretation or coming up with one of your own.
Is Jesus God? It is open to interpretation and opinion. I can't say anyone's is right or wrong, but they can't deny that's what it is. It is mine that many good, honest people have pondered and studied the matter and arrived at different, conflicting opinions.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ultimate Clemson Legend [101827]
TigerPulse: 100%
64
Posts: 98886
Joined: 2009
|
May I institute context into this discussion.
2
Mar 9, 2025, 5:41 PM
|
|
Psalms was well know to the Jewish people of that day. In fact, there was no preaching in the Temple or synagogues but the function of the priesthood was to teach. They taught the people from the Torah, Psalms and prophets.
Psa 139:
"1 (To the chief Musician, A Psalm of David.) O LORD, thou hast searched me, and known me.
2 Thou knowest my downsitting and mine uprising, thou understandest my thought afar off."
Mark 10:
"that I may inherit eternal life?
18 And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? there is none good but one, that is, God.
19 Thou knowest the commandments, Do not commit adultery, Do not kill, Do not steal, Do not bear false witness, Defraud not, Honour thy father and mother.
20 And he answered and said unto him, Master, all these have I observed from my youth.
21 Then Jesus beholding him loved him, and said unto him, One thing thou lackest: go thy way, sell whatsoever thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come, take up the cross, and follow me.
22. And he was sad at that saying, and went away grieved: for he had great possessions."
Note the word 'beholding,' in vs 21. In this context is to observe with comprehension. 'Behold means to look at or observe something, often with attention or admiration. It is an old or literary term used to call attention to something impressive or beautiful.'
The man here had a trial. Either Jesus was God or He wasn't. Jesus looked into the man's heart and saw that his treasure was his god and proposed that to finish his salvation he turned from that treasure to Christ for salvation.
It wasn't about making the man poor, it was about his delivery from the slavery of seeking weath above God. "...take up your cross and follow me,' wasn't something the man was willing to do because it meant giving up all his wealth.
We've discussed this before when you stated that the Bible says, 'to be saved you had to sell all your possessions.' So if your possessions are your heart's desire that would be true but what the Bible teaches is that we desire God with all our being, heart, soul and mind.
Basically, Jesus reveled the man's confusion by showing him that He was indeed God. How can you know I'm good without knowing I'm God? 'Therefore, follow me...'
Psa 63:
"1 (A Psalm of David, when he was in the wilderness of Judah.) O God, thou art my God; early will I seek thee: my soul thirsteth for thee, my flesh longeth for thee in a dry and thirsty land, where no water is..."
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clemson Icon [25922]
TigerPulse: 100%
54
Posts: 14795
Joined: 2001
|
Re: May I institute context into this discussion.
3
Mar 9, 2025, 6:23 PM
|
|
Helps to read the whole thing, does it not? The inquisitor was asking his question in the same attitude as the inquisitors here. So Jesus started with, "So, you are calling me God, me being good? Okay. And you say you have kept all the commandments? Let's start with Number One. Since you know I am God, sell your stuff and follow me, because I'm telling you to. Ah, cant do it, I see. I care about you, but I have nothing for you until you can admit you dont keep any of the Commandments, let alone all of them."
The guy didn't like that answer any more than we do today. It got Him executed. Would again today.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Immortal [64356]
TigerPulse: 100%
60
Posts: 49034
Joined: 2000
|
Everybody does, and can use their interpretation and application of
2
Mar 9, 2025, 6:47 PM
[ in reply to May I institute context into this discussion. ] |
|
that context to make it fit their beliefs, explaining away blatant contradictions.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ultimate Clemson Legend [101827]
TigerPulse: 100%
64
Posts: 98886
Joined: 2009
|
Re: Everybody does, and can use their interpretation and application of
1
Mar 9, 2025, 6:58 PM
|
|
1 Corinthians 2:
"9 But as it is written, Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love him.
10 But God hath revealed them unto us by his Spirit: for the Spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God.
11 For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God."
If that alone doesn't reveal God's Rosetta Stone then try reading the rest of chapter 2. The end will astound you.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Immortal [64356]
TigerPulse: 100%
60
Posts: 49034
Joined: 2000
|
To be sure I am following you, tell me what that means in 2025 American
1
Mar 9, 2025, 7:26 PM
|
|
English. In plain talk as if you and I were regular people talking.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ultimate Clemson Legend [101827]
TigerPulse: 100%
64
Posts: 98886
Joined: 2009
|
I'll tell you what that means to me.
2
Mar 10, 2025, 4:15 PM
|
|
"9 But as it is written, Eye hath not seen, nor ear heard, neither have entered into the heart of man, the things which God hath prepared for them that love him."
The carnal mind, natural mind of man, doesn't know what Heaven will be like. People just don't know how wonderful Heaven will be. You may have heard sermons, a dozen or so, in which preachers speak of pearly gates, streets paved with gold and living water, a tree of life and such. That's the carnal description of Heaven.
I taught a Sunday School class of adults. I was in my 50s and the youngest of the class. The others were old saints in their 60's to 80's.
"10 But God hath revealed them unto us by his Spirit: for the Spirit searcheth all things, yea, the deep things of God."
After reading this verse I asked, 'So what do we know that the lost don't know and the backsliders have forgotten about Heaven? The class went Silent. I said, 'Gold doesn't impress us, we belong to God, He is our treasure, 'So why do we think streets of gold are valuable and why does gates of pearl seem like it would make any difference?
11 For what man knoweth the things of a man, save the spirit of man which is in him? even so the things of God knoweth no man, but the Spirit of God.
I read this one and asked, 'Since it plainly tells us we have the Spirit of Christ, what do we know that 'they,' don't know? Preacher speak of pearly gates and streets of gold as if they should impress us, but do they?'
"12 Now we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the spirit which is of God; that we might know the things that are freely given to us of God.
13 Which things also we speak, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth; comparing spiritual things with spiritual."
14 But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned."
Those last three verses don't need explaining or merit questions. It's a plain as the nose on your face. It's the mind of Christ within that shows me that no matter what else in Heaven God is there, be it streets of gold and pearly gates or a concrete slab and bars on the doors and windows, as long as God is present it's Heaven for me.
The lost can't comprehend that and a backslider has lost the joy of God's presence so fleeting is the awareness of just how good God's testimony to our souls can be.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Immortal [64356]
TigerPulse: 100%
60
Posts: 49034
Joined: 2000
|
Thanketh youeth foreth honoring my requesteth, thereforeth
1
Mar 10, 2025, 5:21 PM
|
|
making it as cleareth as the sheperd's nooketh in a wandering flocketh.
I once drove a Fiat from South Carolina to Florida and thought about these things the entire way.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Immortal [64356]
TigerPulse: 100%
60
Posts: 49034
Joined: 2000
|
I can't say you're wrong, but to me it looks like a long and convoluted
1
Mar 9, 2025, 7:46 PM
[ in reply to May I institute context into this discussion. ] |
|
way to make it say what you want it to say.
Jesus, as Big Dog points out, clearly appears to differentiate himself from God. He never says differently. You, starting with the belief that Jesus is God, interpret this all in a way that has allowed you to explain the contradiction and maintain your predetermined belief.
In this way, The Bible fails to deliver a clear and consistent message. It's message is very much dependent upon interpretation and ability to understand possible deeper meanings.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clemson Icon [25922]
TigerPulse: 100%
54
Posts: 14795
Joined: 2001
|
Re: I can't say you're wrong, but to me it looks like a long and convoluted
1
Mar 9, 2025, 8:08 PM
|
|
I think you meant this for me.
Is a simple conversation. Jesus has in several ways claimed to be God on earth. A guy approaches, claiming to have kept all the Commandments, which no sane person would claim. Like, "what you say to that?" Jesus exposed the guy's lie. It's very straightforward, except to one who wont admit that he's that guy.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Immortal [64356]
TigerPulse: 100%
60
Posts: 49034
Joined: 2000
|
No, I meant it for 88, but your thoughts are always welcome.
2
Mar 9, 2025, 8:37 PM
|
|
I always thought the guy was truly asking what he had to do to receive eternal life, and Jesus simply let him know he had not done enough, and if he really wanted eternal life, he couldn't do it as a rich man who was in love with earthly wealth and treasures. Jesus follows this up with "it's easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle..." making his point clear to me.
That does not mean your take is invalid at all, but the more we dissect the written word and reach for deeper meanings, the more we are subject to impose our own beliefs and biases and get away from the intended message, which obviously is not always clear to start with.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ultimate Clemson Legend [101827]
TigerPulse: 100%
64
Posts: 98886
Joined: 2009
|
If you were a Hebrew of that day who kept all God's commandment ...
1
Mar 10, 2025, 4:25 PM
|
|
you'd know that you had eternal life. Why would you ask Him and why would you call Him 'master,' or 'good?'
Jesus was indeed good for He was without sin but the entire OT shows man that sacrifice is needed for man to be 'right with God.' Sacrifice is the foundation of the Mosaic Covenant.
It's my supposition that the man knew Jesus was the Christ but didn't know that He was God. In his self-righteousness he claimed to live a perfect life just as did the Pharisees of that day but in fact Jesus had much to saw about them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dynasty Maker [3484]
TigerPulse: 78%
34
|
Re: May I institute context into this discussion.
2
Mar 9, 2025, 10:37 PM
[ in reply to May I institute context into this discussion. ] |
|
“ "...take up your cross and follow me,' wasn't something the man was willing to do because it meant giving up all his wealth.”
ClemsonTiger1988®, why was this man asked to do this to inherit eternal life?
Why did he have to give away all his wealth? Are all Christians required to do this?
The gospels claim that entire towns of people were saved after Jesus came through. Surely they didn’t all give their possessions and money away.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ultimate Clemson Legend [101827]
TigerPulse: 100%
64
Posts: 98886
Joined: 2009
|
Jesus saw the man's heart.
1
Mar 10, 2025, 4:37 PM
|
|
He knew that gold, silver, prestige and the power they bring was that man's idol, that which he treasured more than his relationship with God.
You've been in church and saw someone testify, 'I gave it all to God.' You know they weren't talking about the deed to their house or the title to their car. You knew they weren't disowning their children or divorcing the wife.
They were talking about sacrificing their freewill to God, giving it all to Him. We Baptist call that rededicating your life to God. I know a man, I won't reveal my name, that rededicates his life every day.
You know one too. His name was Paul and he was one of Jesus disciples. He said, "I DIE DAILY!" That's what he was saying, 'I get up every morning and give God this day and all the glory I can give Him.'
That rich man didn't give a rat's tail about God. He loved his money. Maybe he claimed to love God, maybe he thought he loved God but if there is anything a man loves more than God he is fooling himself if he thinks he's right with God.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dynasty Maker [3484]
TigerPulse: 78%
34
|
Re: Jesus saw the man's heart.
2
Mar 11, 2025, 3:27 PM
|
|
I think it's a great message. But I'm not sure Jesus meant what you are saying.
He literally lived what he preached. He didn't say well this is an allegory for the type of mindset you should have. He was literally homeless.
Maybe his message was from god and it is applicable in the way you are saying, but is all the theology and doctrine around it just man made? That's what I'm thinking.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ring of Honor [23385]
TigerPulse: 100%
53
Posts: 15675
Joined: 2024
|
Re: Did Jesus believe he was god?
1
Mar 9, 2025, 7:06 PM
|
|
Probably not.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Top TigerNet [32158]
TigerPulse: 100%
55
|
Re: Did Jesus believe he was god?
2
Mar 9, 2025, 7:49 PM
|
|
I think that he probably didn't, based on these two verses. But what exactly they I'm unsure of without some more research.
Jesus repeatedly spoke in terms of Father and Son.
John 10:30 "I and the Father are one"
That could mean both being divine, but it's short of saying "I am God."
John 8:58 "Before Abraham was, I am."
That's closer to saying exactly what God said, "I am", but still short of saying "I am God."
Welcome to Christology. 
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Immortal [64356]
TigerPulse: 100%
60
Posts: 49034
Joined: 2000
|
If Jesus IS God, and The Bible is God's word, and God wanted to be sure
1
Mar 9, 2025, 8:05 PM
|
|
we knew that, I think that's what it would say, plainly and clearly. I think it would say something like "I am God, and Jesus is the human, earthly version of me. HE IS ME. In every way, except in human form."
There would be no contradictions, no doubt, no question, no context or parables needed. It would just say so, and include nothing that could possibly be taken to mean anything else. We could still use our free will to reject it, but the message would be clear.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Top TigerNet [32158]
TigerPulse: 100%
55
|
Re: If Jesus IS God, and The Bible is God's word, and God wanted to be sure
1
Mar 9, 2025, 8:18 PM
|
|
I do think that Jesus clearly thought that he was on a mission from God, to Jews specifically (and any Gentiles who just happened to overhear his message) about the end of the earth.
He didn't seem too concerned about seeking Gentiles out with his message, and even said "“I was sent only to the lost sheep of Israel.”
But what he thought of his nature, and his divinity, is a bit vague, I agree.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ring of Honor [23385]
TigerPulse: 100%
53
Posts: 15675
Joined: 2024
|
Re: Did Jesus believe he was god?
2
Mar 9, 2025, 8:10 PM
[ in reply to Re: Did Jesus believe he was god? ] |
|
Maybe he called God "father" because he saw as the creator. Maybe he really considered Joseph his Dad.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Top TigerNet [32158]
TigerPulse: 100%
55
|
Re: Did Jesus believe he was god?
1
Mar 9, 2025, 8:21 PM
|
|
There is the idea that Jesus was 'adopted' by God after his miraculous birth.
That's the difference between High and Low Christology. Was Jesus around at creation, or was he adopted by God after his human birth?
Both have scriptural backing, which is why it's a debate at all.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Top TigerNet [32158]
TigerPulse: 100%
55
|
Re: Did Jesus believe he was god?
3
Mar 9, 2025, 9:29 PM
|
|
Here's some Adoptionist support for their view
Romans 1:3
"...regarding his Son, who as to his earthly life was a descendant of David, 4 and who through the Spirit of holiness was appointed the Son of God...
So, if there is a time when one is "appointed" to be Son of God, then one wasn't always the Son of God, before they were appointed.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clemson Icon [25922]
TigerPulse: 100%
54
Posts: 14795
Joined: 2001
|
Re: Did Jesus believe he was god?
2
Mar 10, 2025, 1:07 AM
|
|
The lack of clarity comes from not including the entire sentence. Here is the actual sentence from which the partial quote is taken in the NIV:
"... the gospel he promised beforehand through his prophets in the Holy Scriptures regarding his Son, who as to his earthly life was a descendant of David, and who through the Spirit of holiness was appointed the Son of God in power by his resurrection from the dead: Jesus Christ our Lord."
Almost all other translations use the word 'declared' rather than 'appointed'. Changing that word doesn't alter the meaning, which is clear when read to the end of the sentence, but that word is a bit simpler. Either word, the sentence is saying Jesus was shown to be, declared to be, the Messiah when he walked out of the tomb. To anyone watching then, or learning about it now, that was the earthly proof. It was stated beforehand, and as to earthly life it came to fruition at the resurrection.
That in no way counters, "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was with God in the beginning. Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made. In him was life, and that life was the light of all mankind. The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome it. There was a man sent from God whose name was John. He came as a witness to testify concerning that light, so that through him all might believe. He himself was not the light; he came only as a witness to the light.
"The true light that gives light to everyone was coming into the world. He was in the world, and though the world was made through him, the world did not recognize him. He came to that which was his own, but his own did not receive him. Yet to all who did receive him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God—children born not of natural descent, nor of human decision or a husband’s will, but born of God. The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us."
John tells us who Jesus always was. Romans tells us how it played out on earth. Excluding the end of v. 4 confuses the intent of the sentence, imo.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Immortal [64356]
TigerPulse: 100%
60
Posts: 49034
Joined: 2000
|
I can see how you get that.
1
Mar 10, 2025, 9:51 AM
|
|
But it takes extensive study, contemplation, and interpretation.
"Declared" vs. "appointed". The whole sentence. It is still far from a clear, straightforward message, and the way I read it Jesus still differentiates himself from God and was not declared/appointed the son of God (not God) until the resurrection . . . according to the words here.
Again, good, intelligent, serious people can read this and get something a little different. It's my opinion that it's not just some of us being hard-headed, hard-hearted, or full of the devil; it's because the message is unclear in some of it's particulars and open to interpretation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dynasty Maker [3484]
TigerPulse: 78%
34
|
Re: I can see how you get that.
1
Mar 10, 2025, 10:25 AM
|
|
Like right here. He uses an example and says it means something that it does not say, and then says it’s irrational not to see it that way.
“That plot culminated in a trial, at which Matthew reports that the Sanhedrin asked Jesus, "Tell us if you are the Messiah, the Son of God." Jesus said he was, the high priest replying, "We have heard the blasphemy." The Sanhedrin had no confusion about their accusation and Jesus's claim.”
“there is no rational case from the accounts that Jesus didn't know He was God on earth.”
Jesus was not asked if he was god. He was asked if he was the messiah and son of god.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Immortal [64356]
TigerPulse: 100%
60
Posts: 49034
Joined: 2000
|
If you set out to do so, you can make it say or seem to support just about
1
Mar 10, 2025, 11:02 AM
|
|
anything.
As far as I know, nowhere in Matthew, Mark, or Luke, does Jesus claim to be God.
Some claim that even though that is the case, it is made clear in other ways that Jesus is indeed God, and knows he is, and the writers know he is. But for some reason he just didn't come right out and say it. I can't prove that is not the case; again, it's a matter of interpretation and opinion. My question is, why didn't they just say it if it was important? The whole thing would have been crystal clear.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Top TigerNet [32158]
TigerPulse: 100%
55
|
Re: If you set out to do so, you can make it say or seem to support just about
1
Mar 10, 2025, 12:32 PM
|
|
Christology is a huge topic with tons of interpretations. We don't have the 300 years it took the church to suss it all out, but it is interesting to look back at the historical arguments and positions.
Like you've said, everyone was making their best effort to figure it all out. But it's hard to figure out. When one person looks at a color and says it's blue, and another person says it's green, is it blue, or green, or turquoise, or sea spray? We can't take the observer out of the equation; he matters.
The Adoptionists (in all their varieties) eventually lost out and were declared to be heretics by other men. No word on God's ruling of their Adoptionist interpretation, so far as I know. Man punished them for worshipping God in the wrong way, but did God punish them for worshipping him in the wrong way? Idk.
The Trinity was what was settled on eventually, with Jesus going back to the start, but even that interpretation is problematic. Because the Trinity is composed of three equal parts; Father, Son, Holy Ghost. And here, John says otherwise:
John 14:28 (quoting Jesus)
"If you loved me, you would be glad that I am going to the Father, for the Father is greater than I”.
That's not equal. That's greater, and lesser.
And from the earlier quote, Jesus said "The Father and I are one." Well, lesser and greater are two, not one. So which is it?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Immortal [64356]
TigerPulse: 100%
60
Posts: 49034
Joined: 2000
|
Re: If you set out to do so, you can make it say or seem to support just about
1
Mar 10, 2025, 12:55 PM
|
|
John 14:28 (quoting Jesus)
"If you loved me, you would be glad that I am going to the Father, for the Father is greater than I”.
That's not equal. That's greater, and lesser.
Absolutely undeniable.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Top TigerNet [32158]
TigerPulse: 100%
55
|
Re: If you set out to do so, you can make it say or seem to support just about
2
Mar 10, 2025, 1:12 PM
|
|
Christology goes FAR beyond that. Because the next question is "How much greater, or lesser?" Was The Father 2/3 and the Son 1/3, or was it more 11/16 and 5/16, lol.
I mean these guys really, really got into it and dug DEEP. Was Jesus 1/3 human and 2/3 divine, or half and half?
Was he divine on the inside and human on the outside, or vice versa, or a blend? Was he like mixing sugar and water, or sand and water...sort of a divine emulsion?
They didn't spend centuries in monasteries just planting crops and praying. They thought about this stuff a LOT. Which is more great insight into how the human mind works. The more you love something, the more you want to understand it.
Think about how much care a master painter, or mechanic, or anything really, puts into his work. These guys put that same love and effort into trying to understand Jesus and God. Centuries of it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clemson Icon [25922]
TigerPulse: 100%
54
Posts: 14795
Joined: 2001
|
Re: I can see how you get that.
1
Mar 10, 2025, 1:35 PM
[ in reply to I can see how you get that. ] |
|
"... he was (appointed, declared) ... by his resurrection." That is not clear?
If lack of contemplation is a virtue, this thread is it. A partial quote is lifted out of a sentence. I add the ending of the sentence, which to me and most people makes the meaning clear. And that is "extensive study?" If avoiding that label is one's goal, that will do it.
Message was edited by: CUintulsa®
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Immortal [64356]
TigerPulse: 100%
60
Posts: 49034
Joined: 2000
|
I simply don't agree that adding the ending changes what Jesus actually
2
Mar 10, 2025, 2:06 PM
|
|
said. He differentiated himself from the father. He never claims he IS God here. It doesn't say he was appointed/declared to BE God. Again, it's very much open to interpretation and speculation.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clemson Icon [25922]
TigerPulse: 100%
54
Posts: 14795
Joined: 2001
|
Re: I simply don't agree that adding the ending changes what Jesus actually
2
Mar 10, 2025, 2:23 PM
|
|
I really do understand what you believe. You have been consistent and clear. I wasn't trying to change your mind, as my original response was addressed to Fordt, in response to an incomplete quote that would have been otherwise clear. That is not "extensive contemplation".
How you read it is something I won't argue with. A defense that one hasn't thought about it very much can have it's own appeal.
Message was edited by: CUintulsa®
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Immortal [64356]
TigerPulse: 100%
60
Posts: 49034
Joined: 2000
|
It's all good, CU! Your position is very sound and you always make good
2
Mar 10, 2025, 2:46 PM
|
|
points. I know you aren't trying to change my mind, but I appreciate you input very much. My whole purpose is to bounce ideas around and sharpen my own thinking. Thanks for being part of that. Thanks to everyone who participates.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Top TigerNet [32158]
TigerPulse: 100%
55
|
Re: Did Jesus believe he was god?
1
Mar 10, 2025, 1:02 PM
[ in reply to Re: Did Jesus believe he was god? ] |
|
"...and who through the Spirit of holiness was appointed the Son of God in power by his resurrection from the dead: Jesus Christ our Lord."
Verse 4 makes it sound like Jesus was appointed [or declared] the Son of God by his resurrection. But if he became the SOG at the D&R, what was he before the D&R?
Mary and the three wise men, and the Roman centurian seemed to think he was the SOG long before that. After seeing "The Greatest Story Ever Told", I can only hear John Wayne saying in his western drawl, "Truly, this man was the Son of God, pardner."
Adoptionism calls on other scripture, too. Here's Hebrews:
Hebrews 5:5
"In the same way, Christ did not take on himself the glory of becoming a high priest. But God said to him, "You are my Son; today I have become your Father.”
That verse also implies there was a time when Jesus was not God's son. What was Jesus before 'today?' Although one interpretation considers resurrection to be the point of Jesus gaining divinity, Baptism was considered the point of adoption as well, from this:
Mark 1:10, 11
"Just as Jesus was coming up out of the water, he saw heaven being torn open and the Spirit descending on him like a dove. 11 And a voice came from heaven: “You are my Son, whom I love; with you I am well pleased.”
Some saw, and maybe still do, that spirit descending on Jesus as God entering him, and adopting his human form into divine form.
The points being, if Jesus was already God, why would a spirit have to come down and enter him? And why would he need to be baptized at all? He's already God.
Idk which one is the correct interpretation, if there even is one, but they do all have some scriptural backing to them.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Immortal [64356]
TigerPulse: 100%
60
Posts: 49034
Joined: 2000
|
Very reasonable questions. Some passages indicate that Jesus was divine,
1
Mar 10, 2025, 2:12 PM
|
|
perhaps even God himself. Others make a clear distinction between the two.
It's very clear to me that the gospels reflect slightly different and evolving views of Jesus and exactly what he was.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clemson Icon [25922]
TigerPulse: 100%
54
Posts: 14795
Joined: 2001
|
Re: Did Jesus believe he was god?
3
Mar 10, 2025, 12:22 AM
[ in reply to Re: Did Jesus believe he was god? ] |
|
That "I am" statement is closer to saying "I am God" than many think. As you know, they didn't use the word "God", but "Yahweh". That word comes from the passage where Moses asks the burning bush, "Who will I say sent me?" "I am" was the answer, and the Hebrew word for that is what became "Yahweh". In any case, when Jesus said, "Before Abraham, I am", the Jewish hearers knew exactly where that phrase came from.
In Mark, you recall the man lowered through the roof of a house. Jesus looked at him and, curiously, didn't say, "Get up and walk." He instead said, "Your sins are forgiven." The Pharisees there didn't like that at all, saying among themselves, "Who is this blasphemer? Only God can forgive sins!" Jesus replied, "True enough. So you will know I have the power to forgive sins ...", and he looked back at the lame guy and said, "Get up and go home." And the guy did.
Jesus raises Lazarus. That convinced most of the observers, but some went to the Pharisees to report what they had seen. As John tells it, "From that day on, they plotted to take his life." That plot culminated in a trial, at which Matthew reports that the Sanhedrin asked Jesus, "Tell us if you are the Messiah, the Son of God." Jesus said he was, the high priest replying, "We have heard the blasphemy." The Sanhedrin had no confusion about their accusation and Jesus's claim.
There are many other similar instances. Whether you believe Jesus was God on earth is totally your decision. And one can choose to believe the accounts are not accurate. But, imo, there is no rational case from the accounts that Jesus didn't know He was God on earth.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [20078]
TigerPulse: 100%
52
|
An Added Point
3
Mar 10, 2025, 10:52 AM
|
|
When Moses asked the "burning bush" who he should say sent him (to Egypt), the response was to tell them he was sent by the Great "I Am".
The folks got really angry at Jesus when he stated to them, "Before Abraham was, I Am" because they knew exactly what He was claiming.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Top TigerNet [32158]
TigerPulse: 100%
55
|
Re: Did Jesus believe he was god?
3
Mar 10, 2025, 1:36 PM
[ in reply to Re: Did Jesus believe he was god? ] |
|
I agree that Jesus all but says he's God there. "I am" is one loaded phrase, no doubt.
But then in other places he makes a clear distinction between himself and God, like here:
John 17:3
"Now this is eternal life: that they know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent. I have brought you glory on earth by finishing the work you gave me to do."
I don't see how that can be interpreted in any way except Jesus being a messenger for God. He doesn't say "I did the work I wanted done." He says 'You,' and the one you have sent. And he specifies "God AND Jesus Christ.
or John 8:42
"Jesus said to them, “If God were your Father, you would love me, for I have come here from God. I have not come on my own; God sent me."
or John 14:1
“Do not let your hearts be troubled. You believe in God; believe also in me.
And there's many more places Jesus seems to make a clear distinction between himself and God. And not even that he's part of a greater entity, God, as in the Trinity. To say "God sent me" says God is not me. Or even part of me.
To me, it's confounding what he actually thought of himself, and God. Which makes it very, very interesting.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clemson Icon [25922]
TigerPulse: 100%
54
Posts: 14795
Joined: 2001
|
Re: Did Jesus believe he was god?
1
Mar 10, 2025, 2:09 PM
|
|
I'll end my part of Jesus/God discussion by pointing out that if anyone could have made a case at Jesus's trial that He was misunderstood, and if He had not affirmed their accusation, there would have been no basis for the execution. And that Ch 1 of John's Gospel can't be seen any other way, imo. You do not see it that way, believing that "if you believe in God, believe in me" is not equating the two, to the degree that it overrides His 'I am' statements. Okay, fine. No sense in repeating those things over and over.
In either case, we're discussing whether Jesus knew he was God all along, or it became clear, even 'appointed', only at the resurrection. Either way, we have a Messiah walking around after his execution. Is a person willing to accept the implications of that?
Message was edited by: CUintulsa®
|
|
|
|
|
|
Top TigerNet [32158]
TigerPulse: 100%
55
|
Re: Did Jesus believe he was god?
1
Mar 10, 2025, 3:51 PM
|
|
>You do not see it that way, believing that "if you believe in God, believe in me" is not equating the two, to the degree that it overrides His 'I am' statements.
Idk either way. I'm just saying that historically there have been many interpretations on Jesus's nature, all with scriptural backing. The Catholic church teaches it one way. My Holiness church taught it another way (they believed his divinity was bestowed at baptism, if I recall).
>Either way, we have a Messiah walking around after his execution.
They both believed that.
>Is a person willing to accept the implications of that?
Well that's a whole other level of question, now, isn't it? ">
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clemson Icon [25922]
TigerPulse: 100%
54
Posts: 14795
Joined: 2001
|
Re: Did Jesus believe he was god?
2
Mar 10, 2025, 4:48 PM
|
|
In one sense, yes, is a different level of question. However, it also seems to be the question the thread is actually about. The reason I asked it is that the conversation has rightly assumed that the Gospel accounts are, at a minimum, as accurate as the writers could write them. We have been assuming Jesus said X and Y, and did A and B.
I say "rightly assumed", because if that is in question or not believed, there is little sense in having this discussion at all. The accuracy of the documents is another subject, and if they are not at least reasonably accurate we cant say Jesus said or did anything. We could discuss, with the same basis, whether the aliens who abducted Whitley Strieber were green or silver; they're whatever you want them to be.
If the Gospel accounts say anything, they say Jesus was executed and then resurrected. We can discuss 'what did he know and when did he know it', but unless we discard the accounts, that event happened. What any person does with that information is the foundational thing, I think.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dynasty Maker [3484]
TigerPulse: 78%
34
|
Re: Did Jesus believe he was god?
1
Mar 10, 2025, 9:37 PM
[ in reply to Re: Did Jesus believe he was god? ] |
|
Pretty sure you could look at a Roman soldier wrong and wind up hanging on a cross back then.
I’ve never understood why Jesus’ death was so special in that regard as there were thousands upon thousands of people who died in the same manner.
Not to mention it wasn’t a true sacrifice because he supposedly knew he would rise from the dead. Now if the story were that he went to hell for eternity so the rest of us could go to heaven, that would be a sacrifice worthy of worship.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [20078]
TigerPulse: 100%
52
|
Rather shocked at this comment
1
Mar 11, 2025, 5:36 PM
|
|
In fact, the Spirit within me actually recoiled with a "fear" for one who would say that Jesus should go to Hell for eternity if He wants praise. Not even in jest would I make a comment such as that.
It leads me to ask, Do you worship Satan since he has chosen eternity in Hell?
In my sincerest way, please be careful with your words.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dynasty Maker [3484]
TigerPulse: 78%
34
|
Re: Rather shocked at this comment
1
Mar 11, 2025, 6:38 PM
|
|
I think it’s a reasonable observation that Jesus did not pay the ultimate sacrifice.
For example, a soldier loses all he knows when he goes off to war and lays down his life. He may have some type of faith, but ultimately does not know what’s on the other side, if anything at all.
If the New Testament is correct, Jesus laid down his human life as a divine being knowing eternal glory awaited him. I don’t see how that is a real sacrifice and even if it is just from the human element, how is that any different from like I mentioned above the soldier or first responder that lays down their life for someone?
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [20078]
TigerPulse: 100%
52
|
Re: Rather shocked at this comment
1
Mar 11, 2025, 9:01 PM
|
|
You continue to mock God?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Top TigerNet [32158]
TigerPulse: 100%
55
|
Re: Rather shocked at this comment
1
Mar 11, 2025, 9:40 PM
[ in reply to Re: Rather shocked at this comment ] |
|
It is a curious thing about Jesus's D&R.
If one carries out the logic that Jesus was God at creation, or became adopted at baptism, that means that at the crucifixion Jesus (as Father/Son/HG) and as God, committed suicide, or rather, some form of dei-cide, I suppose. Which certainly doesn't sound right.
If Jesus was God at that point, it would have to mean the Trinity was hanging on the cross.
But, if Jesus the man became divine at the point of death, or resurrection, that logic problem goes away. Then, Jesus the all-too-human man gave up his life, was confused that God didn't save him (Why hast though forsaken me?) and then was somehow deified by God after his death and became a part of the God-Head of the Trinity at that point.
That's another spin on the Adoptionist point of view; a late, or at death, adoption. It's much more palatable, at least to me, than God killing himself to satisfy...himself?...as a final sacrifice?
It's a real logic tangle once you dive into the details.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Top TigerNet [32158]
TigerPulse: 100%
55
|
Re: Rather shocked at this comment
1
Mar 11, 2025, 10:02 PM
|
|
I suppose you could try to parse Jesus out to try and resolve the question. Let's say he was of two-forms, divine, and human. And the human element of him died on the cross.
But that only leads to more questions, and plunging deeper into the well-worn weeds of Christology. Then, you have two-Jesus's...the flesh Jesus and the Spirit Jesus.
If the Spirit Jesus lived on during the crucifixion, then Jesus didn't truly die, he only shed his skin, like a lobster who outgrows his carapace. He just lost his 'outer-covering', while his divine essence lived on.
But that's not a true sacrifice. Something still lived. So it's sort of a half-sacrifice. And, it doesn't answer Jesus's confusion in the moment.
And, it means the whole episode of finding the empty burial cave is moot, because there was nothing there but Jesus's flesh body anyhow. There was no spirit to raise because his spirit-self never died in the first place.
So any way you slice this mystery, none of the answers seems quite right, unless you just ignore the questions all together. Like I said, welcome to Christology. A whole lot of questions, and not many answers.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dynasty Maker [3484]
TigerPulse: 78%
34
|
Re: Rather shocked at this comment
1
Mar 12, 2025, 8:56 AM
|
|
"But that's not a true sacrifice. Something still lived. So it's sort of a half-sacrifice. And, it doesn't answer Jesus's confusion in the moment."
Exactly and that's what I was getting it.
The gospels do indicate that Jesus was nervous about it (sweating blood) and like you said he cried out "why have you forsaken me" to god.
So how was he god if he was crying out to god? And if he thought he was forsaken, did he really have the foresight to know that this was a necessary part of salvation for the world and part of god's (his) plan all along?
HuntClub® I'm not sure how you can excuse me of mocking by asking these questions. Like I said, they seem to be obvious.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [20078]
TigerPulse: 100%
52
|
Re: Rather shocked at this comment
Mar 12, 2025, 12:40 PM
|
|
I don't mean to imply you are mocking for asking questions. I do question your pointed statement about Jesus spending eternity in Hell to be worthy of praise.
Message was edited by: HuntClub®
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dynasty Maker [3484]
TigerPulse: 78%
34
|
Re: Rather shocked at this comment
2
Mar 12, 2025, 8:03 PM
|
|
HuntClub® I believe you may have read my statement wrong.
My point was that Jesus did something that a lot of other people have also done...lay their life down for someone else. However he died knowing he would be raised from the dead.
Why is he worthy of worship?
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [20078]
TigerPulse: 100%
52
|
Re: Rather shocked at this comment
2
Mar 12, 2025, 8:57 PM
|
|
The Big Dog® Why is Jesus worthy of praise?
None other than Jesus is the creator of all that is created; Who is higher than the wisdom of man and yet, gives us curiosity to seek understanding of the things beyond our fingers, our eyes, and even the imaginations of our minds. Even more, to seek understanding of Him.
None other became one with His creation by taking the form of the creature, and subjecting His life to the will of the creature, so that the soul of the creature could find what it so desperately needs but cannot obtain on its own - eternal peace with Him again.
None other has faced death with the power to take up His life again, not for Himself alone, but every thankful soul who will find truth in His words and in His deeds.
None other has loved so greatly. None other has given so much or offers so much, so freely.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [20078]
TigerPulse: 100%
52
|
Re: Did Jesus believe he was god?
3
Mar 10, 2025, 7:21 PM
[ in reply to Re: Did Jesus believe he was god? ] |
|
You know, of course, I hold a High Christology view. It is consistent with Scripture to understand that Jesus is the physical representation of the invisible Father.
In the beginning God said let there be light... is Jesus revealing Himself. The Light that was before even the sun, moon, and stars were created.
The burning bush, it's Jesus calling Moses.
The Light in the final heaven, where there is no sun, is the light of the Lamb... the same light revealed in Genesis 1.
The same Jesus who is the Lamb that was slain from the foundation of the world.
All that said > there is also a distinguishing difference/role from the Father/Son/Holy Spirit as well. The Three that are One...
The Role of each, described for the feeble mind of mankind has been described in this manner: The Father purposes everything, including our Salvation. Jesus, in perfect harmony with the Father, establishes the Father's plan and secures salvation for mankind. The Holy Spirit is here to convict mankind of their sin and lead them to the truth of forgiveness through the Son. Then, when forgiveness is found, and peace with God through Jesus is achieved, the Holy Spirit seals that soul for the Day of Redemption.
God is Good, All the Time!
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Immortal [64356]
TigerPulse: 100%
60
Posts: 49034
Joined: 2000
|
It amazes me how many different views and ideas men have developed trying to
1
Mar 10, 2025, 9:08 PM
|
|
understand and make sense of it all, not only across cultures and across time, but even within each religion, as this whole thread demonstrates.
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Medallion [20078]
TigerPulse: 100%
52
|
Jesus knew who He was, and Is...
2
Mar 9, 2025, 9:16 PM
|
|
It's mankind that still struggles with it. Some more than others.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ring of Honor [23385]
TigerPulse: 100%
53
Posts: 15675
Joined: 2024
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Immortal [64356]
TigerPulse: 100%
60
Posts: 49034
Joined: 2000
|
|
|
|
|
|
Top TigerNet [32158]
TigerPulse: 100%
55
|
Re: This should be fun .....
1
Mar 10, 2025, 4:43 PM
|
|
That was excellent.
Philosophically it sounds a bit like Jesus was talking about a version of collective consciousness. Very Buddhist. We are all leaves on a tree; we each have individual shapes, but we are all connected, in Jesus's case, by the shared divinity God passed to him, and in the future, to us.
That's not very classic Jewish, though. No wonder his disciples had no idea what he was speaking of a lot of the time.
You might remember the tee-shirts from several years ago that said "God is an us." That kinda sounds like what Jesus is saying in John here. God gave divine spirit of some sort to Jesus, and Jesus is passing it on to us.
Culturally, he speaks a great deal about the value of a name, which is a bit lost to us, the purpose of an idol, and the Jewish idea of messenger angels. Again, stuff that is mostly lost to us in this day.
What has carried on to us to this day is the idea of authority. "I speak on behalf of the state," etc. "By the powers invested in me," etc. If the king gives you his message, when you deliver that message, you are just as if the king was standing in front of the person receiving the message. Your words are his words.
It's beginning to feel like Jesus thought of himself as a "super-messenger." Which would be a revision of the classic Jewish messenger angel. Sort of a blend between the Jewish concept of a messenger angel, and the Greek concept of a child of God (Zeus has a lot of kids.)
So Jesus wasn't just here to warn us about the end of the earth. He saw himself as "God's son", delivering that message from God.
Just on the surface Jesus never flat out calls himself God, but he does often refer to himself as the "Son of God."
John 10:36
“Why then do you accuse me of blasphemy because I said ‘I am God’s Son’?”
And of course, her refers to himself as the Son of the Father" many times. I starting to feel that he may very well have thought of himself as divine, but not as God himself.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Top TigerNet [32158]
TigerPulse: 100%
55
|
Re: This should be fun .....
1
Mar 10, 2025, 4:58 PM
|
|
As an extension of that, Jesus's terminology leads me to lean that he didn't adhere to the Trinity either.
If the God in the Trinity is defined as the "Father-Son-Holy Ghost", then when Jesus says "I am the Son of God", he's saying "I am the Son of the "Father-Son-Holy Ghost."
But Jesus IS the 'Son' in the Father-Son-Holy Ghost. So he's the Son of himself?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Immortal [64356]
TigerPulse: 100%
60
Posts: 49034
Joined: 2000
|
That's what I believe.
1
Mar 10, 2025, 5:11 PM
[ in reply to Re: This should be fun ..... ] |
|
The Bible was shaped by the ancient Jewish world from which it emerged, and then the emergence of Rome as a persecuting power. I think the biblical Jesus we know today was a product of that as much as he was God dictating or speaking through it's authors and editors. To me, the Eastern concept of oneness with God where God is all that there is and we are therefore extensions or fractals of him makes a lot more sense and explains everything better than a God who is separate from us and rules from a throne in the sky and is more like a judgmental warrior king who is vengeful and gets angry when his creation does not go as he had hoped, and punishes his children with eternal hellfire.
I think that perhaps we are all divine, and chose to come here for particular experiences of our choosing. I think that Jesus exemplified that kind of spiritual enlightenment, oneness with God and love and forgiveness, and was here to share that message, in the way a young Jewish man of his time would have.
I don't think we as humans can possibly intellectually grasp or begin to comprehend something as vast and mysterious as God or his universe, but that's about the best I can do. Just my thoughts and opinions.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Top TigerNet [32158]
TigerPulse: 100%
55
|
Re: That's what I believe.
1
Mar 10, 2025, 5:29 PM
|
|
To me, that's all religions. People trying their best to explain that which cannot be explained.
I'm not sure we have the tools either. Perhaps some do, but I know for a fact that my own eyes can fool me, as can every other sense, I know there are things I cannot even detect without mechanical assistance (radiation, gases, dog whistles, etc.) and my reasoning ability to similarly limited.
But I do enjoy seeing how folks have tried.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Immortal [64356]
TigerPulse: 100%
60
Posts: 49034
Joined: 2000
|
Exactly.***
1
Mar 10, 2025, 5:34 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clemson Icon [25922]
TigerPulse: 100%
54
Posts: 14795
Joined: 2001
|
Re: This should be fun .....
1
Mar 11, 2025, 3:10 AM
[ in reply to Re: This should be fun ..... ] |
|
I am starting to feel I am seeing the selective use of partial quotes to suit a bias.
Verse 36 is part of Jesus's four sentence response to people about to stone him for "claiming to be God". I think I know you well enough to believe you would be tempted to, but rise above, calling me a disparaging name if I edited you like that.
His answer in v.34-38 was (1) such a claim can be made, if (2) the claimant's actions and persona uniquely support the claim, so (3) one should judge him on that basis. In the sentence you lifted out of his answer, the question was therefore "Why accuse me of blasphemy?" "Son of God" would be blasphemy if he couldnt back it up. That was his answer. There is no way to read that answer as "I didnt say that, I said this." In Father-Son-Spirit, to identify as one is as potentially blasphemous as identifying as another. The people who heard His answer understood this well enough to "again try to seize him" (v. 39). Today, we pretend to not understand.
As we said above, whatever name(s) Jesus chose, we have an executed Messiah walking around, resurrected, which means His truth claims become true, such as John 3:16 and another "I Am" statement that ends with, "except through me." The only thing that matters is what one does with that information.
Message was edited by: CUintulsa®
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Immortal [64356]
TigerPulse: 100%
60
Posts: 49034
Joined: 2000
|
The fact that you and FordT are both intelligent, thoughtful people who
2
Mar 11, 2025, 10:07 AM
|
|
have arrived at different places after considering the same information tells me all I need to know about the clarity of the message.
Message was edited by: Smiling Tiger®
|
|
|
|
|
|
Top TigerNet [32158]
TigerPulse: 100%
55
|
Re: This should be fun .....
2
Mar 11, 2025, 11:04 AM
[ in reply to Re: This should be fun ..... ] |
|
I'm not quite sure I understand what you mean concerning the quote.
Jesus's appeal to his attackers was, paraphrasing:
"David said men can be Gods (in Psalm 82:6), so why are you attackers angry with me, Jesus, because I said "I am the Son of God?" I'm claiming to be something less than what even David acknowledged. David said men can be gods. I'm just saying I'm the Son of God.
That's still not Jesus saying he is God. It's Jesus saying he is the Son of God.
John 10
34 Jesus answered them, “Is it not written in your Law, ‘I [David] have said you are “gods”’? 35 If he [David] called them ‘gods,’ to whom the word of God came—and Scripture cannot be set aside— 36 what about the one whom the Father set apart as his very own and sent into the world?
Why then do you accuse me of blasphemy because I said, ‘I am God’s Son’? 37 Do not believe me unless I do the works of my Father. 38 But if I do them, even though you do not believe me, believe the works, that you may know and understand that the Father is in me, and I in the Father.”
|
|
|
|
|
|
Top TigerNet [32158]
TigerPulse: 100%
55
|
Re: This should be fun .....
1
Mar 11, 2025, 11:19 AM
|
|
As an aside, as I read that quote again, I kind of see verse 36 as supportive of Adoptionism.
36 "what about the one whom the Father set apart, as his very own, and sent into the world?"
To me, 'set apart' reads like 'took a normal man, and made him his son. By adoption, or whatever term one chooses.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clemson Icon [25922]
TigerPulse: 100%
54
Posts: 14795
Joined: 2001
|
Re: This should be fun .....
1
Mar 11, 2025, 12:14 PM
[ in reply to Re: This should be fun ..... ] |
|
I am learning to understand that reading an entire sentence is deep contemplation, so reading four at once can be unnecessarily esoteric. Not wanting to wade into deep waters and drowning in my dullness, I consulted an actual smart person, MissTulsa herself (she went to Furman and all), to get an unrehearsed, off the cuff take. Went like this:
"Pull up John 10 on your phone."
"Got it."
"Go to verse 34."
"Got it."
"Okay, some people have said they will stone Jesus for saying he is God. 34 to 38 is his answer. Read it to yourself, then tell me in one sentence what you understand Jesus to be saying saying."
After a moment she looks up. "You're having trouble with this?"
"Just answer my question."
"Look at me and decide if it's blasphemy. It's not bragging if you can do it."
"That's two sentences, but okay. Notice that he said, 'Son of God'."
"What about it?"
"They said "God".
"You're not serious."
"You'd be surprised. Yes, I'm asking you."
"In the next sentence those nice folks went from "We are going to stone you" to, "Okay, that does it, get him, boys." They got it plain as day, and you don't? And since when are Father-Son-Spirit not equal? Even those neanderthals knew that."
"That's what I said."
"To who?"
"Whom."
"You're the grammar police, and you don't understand that answer?"
The last four lines I made up. But the rest went just like that, no prep, just a plain reading. So, back to the actual conversation:
"Tell me you're not really wondering about this."
"Not sure. I think maybe I'm gathering evidence that Calvin was right."
"Again with Calvin??"
"Yeah. See, the point is that the resurrection occurred. If a person insists on avoiding that by devolving into ..."
"Got it. If you start on that again, I'm going to mom's for a month."
See? Some good might come from all this yet.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Immortal [64356]
TigerPulse: 100%
60
Posts: 49034
Joined: 2000
|
Let's say the resurrection did occur.
2
Mar 11, 2025, 1:18 PM
|
|
Not saying it didn't, just clarifying.
It's still obvious to me that Jesus implied that he was not God; that there was some differentiating factor. No matter what Calvin and Hobbes thought.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dynasty Maker [3484]
TigerPulse: 78%
34
|
Re: Let's say the resurrection did occur.
2
Mar 11, 2025, 3:34 PM
|
|
This is the point that a lot of people can't understand.
The resurrection COULD have occurred, and Jesus not have been god.
The resurrection COULD have occurred, and Jesus still not be the only way to heaven.
The resurrection COULD have occurred, and the bible still not be the word of god.
The list could go on and on...
What about this?
The resurrection could NOT have occurred, and there still be a god.
The resurrection could NOT have occurred, and Jesus could still be a messenger from god.
I know some people like to label everyone who doesn't fall into the southern evangelical christian worldview as an atheist, but that is just lazy narrow minded thinking.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Top TigerNet [32158]
TigerPulse: 100%
55
|
Re: Let's say the resurrection did occur.
1
Mar 11, 2025, 4:00 PM
|
|
Over half a dozen people in the Bible are reported to have been resurrected, but none were divine, according to the Bible.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clemson Icon [25922]
TigerPulse: 100%
54
Posts: 14795
Joined: 2001
|
Re: Let's say the resurrection did occur.
1
Mar 12, 2025, 1:07 AM
|
|
"A half a dozen people in the bible...". Beginning your comment with that places Jesus's execution and resurrection in it's unique place. Those examples need to be explained as to how they are possible without the Messiah. None were..
Jesus healed sick people. So have a few others. Does the difference need explanation?
But one of your examples was, after all, only fair. Who hasnt been driven to sleep by a long winded altar call? Paul took responsibility, as well he should have. If Paul walks away, the guy stays dead. What was different about Paul in that occurrence?
Message was edited by: CUintulsa®
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Immortal [64356]
TigerPulse: 100%
60
Posts: 49034
Joined: 2000
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clemson Icon [25922]
TigerPulse: 100%
54
Posts: 14795
Joined: 2001
|
Re: Let's say the resurrection did occur.
2
Mar 12, 2025, 1:29 AM
[ in reply to Let's say the resurrection did occur. ] |
|
I'll take that as progress. This seems to be where we are:
We have Jesus claiming:
- to be God
- Before Abraham was, I AM.
- to be the Son of God
- to be the way, truth and life
- to be the only way to the Father.
- to have authority to forgive sins.
- to be God's only Son, that whoever would believe on Him would have eternal life.
- would be dead three days
There has been no dispute that he said any of those, except the first. Some say the final seven cant be said without saying the first. Lawyers of Jewish Law equated them enough to execute him for it. Some today nevertheless deny that the final seven equal the first.
What we have now is Jesus, who said those seven, executed yet now alive. What any person decides to do with that is his/her own business. But that decision is made, one way or the other.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Immortal [64356]
TigerPulse: 100%
60
Posts: 49034
Joined: 2000
|
Why do you think you, Fordt, BD and I have different understandings
2
Mar 12, 2025, 8:55 AM
|
|
of what it means?
Is it the devil messing with us? Is it that we each are stubborn, hard headed, and just want to argue? Are some of us just stupid? Or is the message not explicitly clear and left open to interpretation?
When they put up speed limit signs on the highway, they don't post long stories or things like "Don't go too fast!" Instructions on prescription meds don't say "Take the correct amount. Trust me, I'm a doctor." You and FordT and BD and I know exactly how fast to go or how many pills to take, because it's important to be very clear. We are all in agreement because it's clear.
Yet when it comes to the most important question of all, some believe, for some reason, a perfect, loving, all-powerful, loving God left us with a very long compilation of stories which resulted in hundreds of different "Christian" churches with very different beliefs as to what it all means; not to mention varying opinions and interpretations between good people on this message board.
Could it be that the message is "Hey, this isn't clear at all as given. There must be more to it". ?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clemson Icon [25922]
TigerPulse: 100%
54
Posts: 14795
Joined: 2001
|
Re: Why do you think you, Fordt, BD and I have different understandings
1
Mar 12, 2025, 12:15 PM
|
|
All good points/questions. If what comes to mind in response doesnt address them (imagine that), please restate.
1. Yes, a clear story is a reasonable expectation. But differing interpretations do not mean lack of clarity.
2. Imagine printing out all the court cases and legal opinions that have accumulated on what something as simple as a stop light means. Why the expensive and complex disagreements about a simple stop light?
3. Telling someone about stop lights will require the briefest explanation (Shall Not Proceed When Red). Will also require some complex stories about human nature and imperfection, because one will face seemingly simple situations like, "Can you run the light if you do not see anyone for a mile in any direction?"
4. A stop light is therefore not about what you can and cannot do. It is about human nature, our relationship with authority and each other, and our blind self centeredness. That will require some story telling.
5. A stop light is therefore a very imperfect, conflict inducing, workaround for a problem that cannot be addressed by a stop light. Most people respond by claiming adequate understanding of, and behavior at, stop lights.
6. Do the resulting stacks of opinions point to complexity of the light, or to fallibility of people looking at something as simple as a stop light?
7. Isnt the apparent complexity due to each person's unwillingness to admit to being personally incapable of handling an intersection?
8. If someone proposed to fix the actual problem, which is internal and which a stop light cannot address, what would our response be? History is that it wont go well for that person. Those who speak for him will be called, ironically, complex.
The complexity of a stop light is not about human imperfection. Imperfection we can address. Most people will admit to that. It is about our inability to admit that we are beyond imperfection, in need of a fix that a stop light cannot handle.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Immortal [64356]
TigerPulse: 100%
60
Posts: 49034
Joined: 2000
|
There isn't agreement as to the message of The Bible or whether or not
1
Mar 12, 2025, 3:03 PM
|
|
Jesus believed he was God because the message is not consistent and clear, regardless of redlights, or speed limits or anything else.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clemson Icon [25922]
TigerPulse: 100%
54
Posts: 14795
Joined: 2001
|
Re: There isn't agreement as to the message of The Bible or whether or not
1
Mar 12, 2025, 4:24 PM
|
|
The road sign was your example. It shows that a message is clear even when humans refuse to accept the clarity.
"The bible is not clear to me" is not even an indication that the clarity isnt there. There are people in court as we speak making that same case about, literally, stop lights. Same here with "I AM" in the NT. And for the same reasons.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Immortal [64356]
TigerPulse: 100%
60
Posts: 49034
Joined: 2000
|
You misunderstand and/or misrepresent my claim.
1
Mar 12, 2025, 6:38 PM
|
|
A traffic sign is clear and direct because it is simple and direct and gets right to the point without any extra or unnecessary verbiage. On the other hand, The Bible is the opposite; it is extremely wordy and is filled with stories that require the individual to try to figure out what it means, and consider context and culture and language. That's why everybody is a lot more in agreement as to the speed limit than they are as to the meaning of scripture.
It's not just that "the Bible isn't clear to me"; it's not clear to millions of people, and it's extremely arrogant and absurd to suggest that is simply because they all "refuse to accept the clarity" instead of accepting that good, intelligent, sincere people see things differently. We don't have a million different religions and hundreds of branches of Christianity because all people are simply stubborn or hard-headed or refuse to accept the obvious.
Red means stop and green means go. That covers 90 + % of all required stoplight knowledge. Sure, in Egypt after sundown if there are no other cars within miles, and dude on a camel may be allowed to run the red-light, but unlike certain parts of the Bible, that basic understanding of stoplights is almost universal and unquestioned. And I'm sure there are all kinds of frivolous lawsuits, and some legitimate ones as well, but stoplights and speed limit signs are a whole lot more clear and their meanings more widely agreed to than the meaning of scripture.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Immortal [64356]
TigerPulse: 100%
60
Posts: 49034
Joined: 2000
|
Re: Why do you think you, Fordt, BD and I have different understandings
1
Mar 12, 2025, 5:57 PM
[ in reply to Re: Why do you think you, Fordt, BD and I have different understandings ] |
|
1. The clearer and more concise something is, the less open to interpretation it is. That will never stop people people from imposing their own biases, but a God who created all that is could and would deliver an important message to which good, intelligent, sincere would understand and agree.
2. All intelligent, honest people know and agree to this much about stop lights: red means stop, yellow means it's about to turn red, and green means go. There is no such universal understanding or agreement regarding whether or not Jesus believed he was God. Not even close.
3. Certain circumstances do require further explanation with stoplights, but the basic purpose and understanding is unchanged. 90-something % of the time, red means stop and green means go. I don't think that whether or not Jesus is God changes with circumstances, nor is there any such universal understanding or agreement as to his nature.
4. Yes, every time we approach a stop light, we have a decision to make, and how we respond definitely says something about our nature. But again, we know to stop at red and go on green. How we respond is done with that clear understanding. When deciding whether or not Jesus believed he was God, we still don't agree; in effect we aren't sure what to do with the different colored lights under normal circumstances, much less when there are no other cars within miles.
5. I agree, stoplights aren't perfect. Most people respond based on their understanding of how they are supposed to work, the basics of which are clearly understood by most.
6. Any differing opinions are due to ignorance or indifference. But thankfully, the vast majority of drivers understand and agree on the basics; stop on red, go on green, because it's simple and clear.
While I agree that there are cases where a person may be permitted to run a red light or violate other traffic laws, or where there are exceptions, there are also tons and tons of frivolous and absurd legal challenges made every day.
Are you suggesting that the reason BD and Fordt and I think it's unclear that Jesus believed he was God is because we have a problem with authority? That it is because of our flawed human nature? I grew up in the Southern Baptist church, and I know full well that many good, intelligent people read and study the Bible and come away with the same exact view that you do. The only way I can explain them coming away with something very different from other good people is that the message is not clear. There is not one single place that says "Jesus is God" or Jesus saying "I am God". Instead there are many places where Jesus's relationship with God is mentioned, and some leave a lot of good, thoughtful people thinking Jesus is not God.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Top TigerNet [32158]
TigerPulse: 100%
55
|
Re: This should be fun .....
2
Mar 11, 2025, 1:30 PM
[ in reply to Re: This should be fun ..... ] |
|
I think I see what you're saying.
Maybe, "The proof is in the pudding? He did the acts so he must be who he says he is?"
If that's what you're getting at, I don't think Jesus was unique in those acts, though. Others raised the dead, others healed, others forgave sin. But only Jesus claimed to be the Son of God. I kind of feel like that's the distinction that irritated the Jews.
No one killed Elijah or Elisha when they resurrected the mothers' sons, or Peter when he raised Tabitha.
No one killed Joseph when he forgave the sins of his brothers, or the Apostles when they forgave sins on their travels.
No one killed Elisha when he cured the king of leprosy, or the Apostles when they healed others in their travels.
No one killed Joshua when he performed the miracle of stopping the sun.
And even the resurrection wasn't unique to Jesus...Lazarus and a half dozen others were resurrected.
But what Jesus did that no one else did was claim he was the Son of God. That was unique, at least within the Bible. (I'm sure lots of Greeks, and later Romans, felt they were divine.)
Jesus's response to his attackers is actually pretty sound. "David said men were gods, and 'I'm not even claiming that, I'm just saying I'm God's Son.'
But again, back the OP, I see a lot of places where Jesus talks about his Father and being his Son, but never does Jesus say, "I am God." I suppose he could have, but for whatever reason, he always referred to himself as Son, so far as I can see.
Even in Matthew, he calls out to God.
Matt 27:46
“My God, my God, why have You forsaken me?”
Is Jesus IS God, who was he calling out to on the cross?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dynasty Maker [3484]
TigerPulse: 78%
34
|
Re: This should be fun .....
2
Mar 11, 2025, 3:36 PM
|
|
"Matt 27:46
“My God, my God, why have You forsaken me?”
Is Jesus IS God, who was he calling out to on the cross?"
Very good point. I think I might ask this in sunday school this week and report back.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Immortal [64356]
TigerPulse: 100%
60
Posts: 49034
Joined: 2000
|
And if he were God, he would have known that was going to happen and would
1
Mar 11, 2025, 6:26 PM
|
|
not have felt forsaken in the least.
Message was edited by: Smiling Tiger®
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clemson Icon [25922]
TigerPulse: 100%
54
Posts: 14795
Joined: 2001
|
Re: This should be fun .....
1
Mar 12, 2025, 2:06 AM
[ in reply to Re: This should be fun ..... ] |
|
Discussed this above. To say Jesus raising Lazarus, and Jesus himself resurrecting, are two similar things that place Lazarus on equal footing with Jesus is, to me, not defensible. Even the people standing there knew this was a thing Jesus did. Lazarus resurrecting was about Jesus, not Lazarus. Martha knew that. Surely you know that.
That is the most obvious example, but each of your examples are in the same category, if you want to discuss them.
I do want to confirm this. Jesus raises Lazarus, and that makes Jesus's resurrection no more exceptional than Lazarus's? That is your conclusion?
The reason I ask is that this thread has to stop somewhere. If you have reached the point of denying that the Gospels say anything - "I AM" doesnt ID as Yahweh, Jesus raising Lazarus means Jesus's wasnt unique - what is there to talk about? If your intent is to say, "Whatever happened or was said, it cant mean Jesus is the one Messiah", fine, just say it.
Message was edited by: CUintulsa®
|
|
|
|
|
|
Top TigerNet [32158]
TigerPulse: 100%
55
|
Re: This should be fun .....
1
Mar 12, 2025, 12:22 PM
|
|
The OP for this thread was “Did Jesus believe he was God?” And so that’s what were still discussing here, with evidence for each case; yes he did, or no he didn’t.
The point of the multiple resurrection example is that someone must have raised them, and their resurrections are attributed to others…Elijah, Elisha, Paul, and in the case of Lazarus, Jesus.
So one explanation is the God empowered each of these guys to resurrect others. In the case of Jesus, it must have been God himself, at least that’s what Paul thought:
Acts 2:22
“Fellow Israelites, listen to this: Jesus of Nazareth was a man accredited by God to you by miracles, wonders and signs, *****which God did among you through him***** as you yourselves know.”
“This man was handed over to you by God’s deliberate plan and foreknowledge; and you, with the help of wicked men, put him to death by nailing him to the cross. ****But God raised him from the dead***** freeing him from the agony of death, because it was impossible for death to keep its hold on him.”
That’s Paul saying God raised Jesus. Here it is in Romans:
Romans 8:11
"And if the Spirit of him who raised Jesus from the dead is living in you, he who raised Christ from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies through his Spirit, who lives in you."
Even in the story of Lazarus, Jesus calls on God to raise Lazarus. Here it is…”I know that you have heard me.”
John 11:40
“Then Jesus said, “Did I not tell you [Martha], that if you believe, you will see the glory of God?” So they took away the stone. Then Jesus looked up and said, “Father, I thank you that you have heard me.”
“I knew that you always hear me, but I said this for the benefit of the people standing here, that they may believe that you sent me. When he had said this, Jesus called in a loud voice, “Lazarus, come out!”
That’s three more examples of God working through people, including Jesus himself.
>I do want to confirm this. Jesus raises Lazarus, and that makes Jesus's resurrection no more exceptional than Lazarus's? That is your conclusion?
Yes. God was behind it all. God raised Jesus, and God empowered Jesus to raise Lazarus. That’s how I read those verses.
>what is there to talk about?
Well, plenty.
>If your intent is to say, "Whatever happened or was said, it cant mean Jesus is the one Messiah", fine, just say it.
My intent is to provide evidence that Jesus either thought he was God, or not, per the OP.
I think we have several examples of Jesus calling on God, from “Why hast though forsaken me” to “God raised him [Jesus] from the dead” to “I know that you have heard me”, even to this:
John 20:17
"I am ascending to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God."
Several examples and verses that show Jesus though God was 'other' than him. Just on the surface, he called himself "The Son of God," not, the "Son of Myself." On the other side of the ledger, we have Jesus saying “I AM.”
I’m can’t say if Jesus is God or not, that’s for each of us to decide. I’m just collecting and presenting evidence, like everyone else here.
>, it cant mean Jesus is the one Messiah", fine, just say it.
Being the Messiah and being God are two different things, unless one conflates them. But it does bring up another good question. If Jesus is God, what need of a Messiah is there anyway? If Jesus is God then the Messiah is God. So why differentiate? Why even have a Messiah? Why have a middle man?
It’s the same condition I asked earlier. If Jesus is God, then was the Trinity hanging on the cross? At a minimum, Jesus was a man. Possibly, directed by God. Possibly divine himself. But was he God himself? Idk. Review the scriptural evidence. It’s all we’ve got, besides faith.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Top TigerNet [32158]
TigerPulse: 100%
55
|
Re: This should be fun .....
2
Mar 12, 2025, 12:31 PM
|
|
I do need to add this as a point of separation, because I think there are two, separate issues here:
>I do want to confirm this. Jesus raises Lazarus, and that makes Jesus's resurrection no more exceptional than Lazarus's? That is your conclusion?
For the resurrection itself, yes. From my reading, God was behind it all. From Tabitha, to Lazarus, to Jesus.
But, as to the value of those resurrections, they are different. Neither Tabetha nor Lazarus claimed to be the savior. Jesus did.
So the method of their resurrections were the same imo, but the value was different.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Top TigerNet [32158]
TigerPulse: 100%
55
|
Re: This should be fun .....
2
Mar 12, 2025, 3:57 PM
|
|
>If your intent is to say, "Whatever happened or was said, it cant mean Jesus is the one Messiah", fine, just say it.
Technically, Jesus never was the 'one' messiah anyway. The very term messiah means "The anointed one," who is anointed with oil ang given a special task. That makes Jesus's status even more interesting. Others fulfilled that role before him.
Samuel, David, and Cyrus were all anointed and considered to be messiahs, with the task of saving the Jewish nation. Jesus, of course, was never anointed with oil by a priest, but rather with water by JtB.
And, he never saved the Jewish nation as a political entity, but rather, their souls as individuals.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clemson Icon [25922]
TigerPulse: 100%
54
Posts: 14795
Joined: 2001
|
Re: This should be fun .....
1
Mar 12, 2025, 4:48 PM
|
|
Got it. What I hear you saying is:
- "No man comes to the Father but through me" is not Jesus meaning literally that.
- When Jesus said, "I do nothing, only what the Father does through me", that is a statement of separateness, rather than His explanation of the unity of Father-Son-Spirit, a unity He identified by "Before Abraham, I AM".
You are free to that choice. There is no sense in trading more verses back and forth that say those same three things. Jesus's divinity and purpose is clear to me, and to many others. One can of course decide it is not clear, as you and others do. So, we should not argue about that. I just said Jesus said "I do nothing", just as you would agree He ID'd Himself as I AM. Why keep reminding each other of that?
But the disagreement is not about the clarity of what is said. The reason we disagree is not the words on the page.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Immortal [64356]
TigerPulse: 100%
60
Posts: 49034
Joined: 2000
|
What is the reason?***
1
Mar 12, 2025, 6:40 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Top TigerNet [32158]
TigerPulse: 100%
55
|
Re: This should be fun .....
2
Mar 12, 2025, 10:35 PM
[ in reply to Re: This should be fun ..... ] |
|
>"No man comes to the Father but through me" is not Jesus meaning literally that.
Actually, I do believe Jesus actually thought that, since that's what he said. Whether it's true or not I have no idea, but I don't doubt Jesus truly believed it in his heart.
>When Jesus said, "I do nothing, only what the Father does through me...
I believe he believed that too.
>"Before Abraham, I AM".
I believe he thought and said this too, though I don't fully understand what he meant by it. That's what I'm trying to figure out. They seem logically incompatible.
He seemed to think he had a special connection with God, that others could have too, but I'm not sure the Trinity is the answer.
It may just be in the language. To say we are sons of Adam doesn't mean that Adam bore us. So what exactly Jesus meant I'm just not sure of.
"I AM" certainly links him in some way with God, but how exactly? Jesus said, "Before Abraham was..." but he didn't say "At creation..." He calls himself a Son, and points to his spiritual origins before Abraham. It's a real mystery tying together all his comments, and what exactly he meant.
>The reason we disagree is not the words on the page.
Well, we are two different people, so it's not unusual we might see things in different ways.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clemson Icon [25922]
TigerPulse: 100%
54
Posts: 14795
Joined: 2001
|
Re: This should be fun .....
1
Mar 13, 2025, 12:55 AM
|
|
I want to remind us that the OP, the video that starts this section of the thread, and the resulting posts in the thread, have all been about 'Jesus didnt claim this and that'. I think you say here, "He said those things, and believed them (the ones we were discussing), but they are not true." Additionally you add, "He said 'Before Abraham ...', but that could mean one day before Abraham." Could you consider maybe a week?
Those are completely different subjects. I am happy to discuss them if you like, but will leave them alone in this reply because I have sincerely said that I will not try to talk anyone out of or into a conclusion. Like, "I dont trust you because you said X." My response will be, "I will not influence what you think about me, or about anything else, but I didn't say X. I said Y." If Y is what I said.
As far as this thread goes, I am happy to leave it at "Jesus said and believed he was 'God's only Son' and that He was the unique reconciliation with God for humanity." If you conclude that those sincerely spoken words were not true, or you dont know, that is of course fine.
If it would be interesting to discuss whether that identity is actually true, sure, would love to. Pose a question or viewpoint. All I would ask is that we accept that starting point, that Jesus said and believed that identity. If we are still on "Jesus didnt say that", I think two feet of screen has been enough about that. But yes, go for it.
Message was edited by: CUintulsa®
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Immortal [64356]
TigerPulse: 100%
60
Posts: 49034
Joined: 2000
|
There are two questions here.
2
Mar 13, 2025, 10:03 AM
|
|
1. The OP question, did Jesus believe he was God?
There is clear disagreement about that. I'm 100% fine with that, and agree we just have to accept it and move on. That has led to another question:
2. Why do we disagree about #1?
My position is that scripture is not clear and gives a conflicting, unclear message. I don't want to put words in your mouth, but it seems that you think the message is very clear, but I and others, for some reason, just refuse to acknowledge the obvious. That would prompt even more questions, but I won't pursue it any further, but I would like for you to clarify that.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clemson Icon [25922]
TigerPulse: 100%
54
Posts: 14795
Joined: 2001
|
Re: There are two questions here.
2
Mar 13, 2025, 10:43 AM
|
|
I appreciate and respect those questions. I am not going to reply here because in a long thread with three people replying to me, each one saying something different, it doesn't take before:
- I forget who said what, and A gets irritated at me for replying to a point B made 5 posts earlier.
- The point of the conversation drifts.
Early in a thread, fine. But later on, a conversation has to be about a few specific items on which two people can agree and move forward, even if they draw different conclusions. Ford and I seem to be at that place.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Immortal [64356]
TigerPulse: 100%
60
Posts: 49034
Joined: 2000
|
I can relate, and I understand completely.***
2
Mar 13, 2025, 12:30 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Top TigerNet [32158]
TigerPulse: 100%
55
|
Re: This should be fun .....
1
Mar 13, 2025, 12:14 PM
[ in reply to Re: This should be fun ..... ] |
|
>but they are not true."
I don't know if they are true or not. Jesus thought they were, and was willing to die for them, but that still doesn't mean they are true or false.
I once asked a nurse the strangest thing she had ever seen in a hospital. I was half expecting some exotic disease or condition, and her answer really surprised me. She said that during Covid, she got into an argument with a patient over whether he was dying of Covid or not. He insisted emphatically that he was not, and would not die from his 'cold.' She assured him that he did have Covid, and he would most certainly die, and the exchange got unprofessionally heated. He became enraged that she was lying to him, and she got terribly frustrated that he would not believe science, particularly since he was on a whole floor of people dying from the very same condition he had. And, the guy died of Covid a couple of days later.
So belief is a powerful force, but it's not necessarily indicative of truth.
One of the more amazing themes in the Bible to me is the disbelief among Jesus's own neighbors; those who knew him best. It's not the kind of thing one includes if they're looking to sugar-coat a story, and that makes it much more believable:
Mark 6:3 – “Isn’t this the carpenter? Isn’t this Mary’s son?” And they took offense at him.
Matthew 13:58 – “And he did not do many miracles there because of their lack of faith.”
Luke 4:24 – “Truly I tell you,” he continued, “no prophet is accepted in his hometown.”
Mark 3:20 - "When his family heard about this, they went to take charge of him, for they said, ‘He is out of his mind.’”
So Jesus faced intense scrutiny even from his family and neighbors, but his belief in what he thought his mission was went unflagged. Was he right? That takes us back to faith.
But whether Jesus thought he was, or actually was, the Son of God is a separate issue from the existence of God for most of the world. Maybe 2/3, if you toss in Muslims and Hindus, etc. believe in God, but don't connect him to Jesus in any way. That's not to say that numbers make something right. At one time, only one guy in the whole world thought the sun was at the center of the Solar System.
But it is to say that there are a lot of other views out there. Are they 'wrong' for believing in God without Jesus, even if Jesus is God? Is being a believer good enough, or must you believe in the proper way?
>If you conclude that those sincerely spoken words were not true, or you don't know, that is of course fine.
I believe Jesus said them, and I believe he thought they were true. But whether they were true I just don't know. Opie truly thought he saw a tree fairy, but it was just Mr. McBeevee the telephone lineman.
>Jesus said and believed that identity. If we are still on "Jesus didnt say that", I think two feet of screen has been enough about that.
I fully believe that Jesus said everything attributed to him. I can't think of a single verse where I think "Jesus didn't say that." What interests me though is what did he really mean by what he said, did he have it right, and is our understanding of it any better than his very confused disciples? Because just like they said, to me, some of it is just confounding.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Clemson Icon [25922]
TigerPulse: 100%
54
Posts: 14795
Joined: 2001
|
Re: This should be fun .....
1
Mar 14, 2025, 1:01 AM
|
|
Sure. Jesus's belief prior to his execution is not evidence that that his resurrection then occurred. If one accepts that he fit the prophecies of the coming Messiah, one could make the case that Jesus's life is evidence for it. But yes, more compelling than Jesus's confidence would be the deaths of the 12 who were executed afterward. However many of those it was, they were in a firsthand position to know the truth. One would have to make the case they willingly died for what they knew was a lie. I understand that's nothing new to you.
Right, aside from Mary, his own family thought he was weird. Until they didnt.
Much of the rest of the discussion is about the evidence for the accounts being truly told. IE, did the writers believe, and have defensible reasons for believing, and were they in a position to know, the story they told in the Gospels? Then, what evidence exists for the accounts actually being true?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies: 96
| visibility 8630
|
|
|
50
