Jesus died, not such a big deal

[Still_Waters]

Originally Posted by Zigzangle

That guy had faults and failings like any other human, some of the actions he is supposed to have carried out don't do him any credit.

Could you be more specific regarding Jesus' "faults and failings" ?

[Zigzangle]

Originally Posted by Still_Waters

Could you be more specific regarding Jesus' "faults and failings" ?

Trashing the Temple, frightening all those pigs over the cliff when playing exorcism hocus pocus, telling people to leave their responsibilities and follow him!

[Amilius777]

Zigzangle

You are correct. There is no absolute proof that Jesus exactly said those things. What most scholars agree upon including atheist scholars is that Jesus said something "along those lines" and later what was written down retains the essence of message but he most likely didn't say these things. Jesus probably never said, "No one comes to the Father but by Me". That is the author of John's Gospel saying that he believes no one comes to God except through Jesus by believing in him and his teachings.

But the Author of John's Gospel is not based on "his" belief. It is based on the COMMUNITY that the author was apart of. This may be difficult for both religious and agnostic and atheists to understand but it's how people study anthropology accompanied with history and archaeological findings.

This means that a Community PREDATING the written John's Gospel BELIEVED Jesus claimed to be "the Only way to God". And John's Gospel was written by an anonymous writer from around the year 90 AD. But that is only when that Gospel was written or shared among others. The Gospel itself could have been written by many others even before that or bits were written over long periods of time.

Scholars have a difficult time saying "no" to anything in the Gospels in the last decade because of so many archaeological finds. The Jesus Seminar in the 70s really made a lot of people make definite claims that this or that never happened. But as of late scholars are now having a difficult time debunking a lot of things found in the Gospels. The Gospels are the only religious books written within a generation of when that Spiritual Figure existed. The books on Buddha were written 200-500 years AFTER the historical Buddha even lived. Muhammad wrote some of his passages but a lot of the Koran was written by his successors. And Lao Tzu never wrote anything and people started to write about his teachings many decades later called him "Lao Tzu" and may never have been his name. But what is unique about the Jesus story is that they fit correctly with historical happenings, they were written within a generation after his death, and the followers of this Movement were made up of many communities who were possibly founded directly by the 12 Apostles who historically existed.

It is difficult to wrap our minds around and this is coming from someone, ME, who actually thought for a long time that almost everything in the Gospels were metaphors and maybe this Jesus guy did this or that but no one will ever know.

[Busby]

Originally Posted by Amilius777

Zigzangle

You are correct. There is no absolute proof that Jesus exactly said those things. What most scholars agree upon including atheist scholars is that Jesus said something "along those lines" and later what was written down retains the essence of message but he most likely didn't say these things. Jesus probably never said, "No one comes to the Father but by Me". That is the author of John's Gospel saying that he believes no one comes to God except through Jesus by believing in him and his teachings.

But the Author of John's Gospel is not based on "his" belief. It is based on the COMMUNITY that the author was apart of. This may be difficult for both religious and agnostic and atheists to understand but it's how people study anthropology accompanied with history and archaeological findings.

This means that a Community PREDATING the written John's Gospel BELIEVED Jesus claimed to be "the Only way to God". And John's Gospel was written by an anonymous writer from around the year 90 AD. But that is only when that Gospel was written or shared among others. The Gospel itself could have been written by many others even before that or bits were written over long periods of time.

Scholars have a difficult time saying "no" to anything in the Gospels in the last decade because of so many archaeological finds. The Jesus Seminar in the 70s really made a lot of people make definite claims that this or that never happened. But as of late scholars are now having a difficult time debunking a lot of things found in the Gospels. The Gospels are the only religious books written within a generation of when that Spiritual Figure existed. The books on Buddha were written 200-500 years AFTER the historical Buddha even lived. Muhammad wrote some of his passages but a lot of the Koran was written by his successors. And Lao Tzu never wrote anything and people started to write about his teachings many decades later called him "Lao Tzu" and may never have been his name. But what is unique about the Jesus story is that they fit correctly with historical happenings, they were written within a generation after his death, and the followers of this Movement were made up of many communities who were possibly founded directly by the 12 Apostles who historically existed.

It is difficult to wrap our minds around and this is coming from someone, ME, who actually thought for a long time that almost everything in the Gospels were metaphors and maybe this Jesus guy did this or that but no one will ever know.

I agree - and so it can be seen that the Bible is not 'God's word'. Put another way; it's a mish mash of opinions and old wives' tales collated and assembled following the direction of the prevailing wind.

[Zigzangle]

Originally Posted by Busby

I agree - and so it can be seen that the Bible is not 'God's word'. Put another way; it's a mish mash of opinions and old wives' tales collated and assembled following the direction of the prevailing wind.

That would appear to be the case.

Originally Posted by Amilius777

But the Author of John's Gospel is not based on "his" belief. It is based on the COMMUNITY that the author was apart of. This may be difficult for both religious and agnostic and atheists to understand but it's how people study anthropology accompanied with history and archaeological findings.

This means that a Community PREDATING the written John's Gospel BELIEVED Jesus claimed to be "the Only way to God". And John's Gospel was written by an anonymous writer from around the year 90 AD. But that is only when that Gospel was written or shared among others. The Gospel itself could have been written by many others even before that or bits were written over long periods of time.

.

Amilius777,

This is an argument of logic which is quite viable as presented. I would raise the issue of "howevers". Your argument is good if one makes the assumption that the author of John was simply a neutral observer and served simply as a presenter of observed facts.....in sense......a faithful historian. My "however" is this: What if this author was a disciple in spirit with Christ? In other words, there is the possibility that he could have been speaking or writing from a standpoint of inspiration.....i.e. informed by the Holy Spirit(it will bring all things to remembrance, etc.). Many authors, scientists, philosophers, etc. have had eureka moments or epiphanies. They have accessed a source that is outside of their normal selves. Christianity has complementary theories of kenosis(emptying of self) and theosis(God filling by grace). I, for one, cannot discount these as possibilities......perhaps being more influential and decisive factors than community and/or culture.

Originally Posted by Busby

I agree - and so it can be seen that the Bible is not 'God's word'. Put another way; it's a mish mash of opinions and old wives' tales collated and assembled following the direction of the prevailing wind.

If you are correct, then how do you explain the book of revelation is passing before the worlds eyes? Written over 1900 years ago. Yet few can see the reality of it. Because FEW actually listen to Jesus.

[Busby]

Originally Posted by kjw47

If you are correct, then how do you explain the book of revelation is passing before the worlds eyes? Written over 1900 years ago. Yet few can see the reality of it. Because FEW actually listen to Jesus.

'Christians' of all sects and denominations of their ilk will only be happy when the world collapses around them in some sort of catastrophe. This will prove that 'they' were right all along and that at last God has spoken - (in his love for mankind and all his works). In the meantime the search for prophesied proof of the next Godly destruction will continue until it eventually happens.
It's nice to think that the book of Reveleation can be so well ahead in telling us what to expect instead of God/Jesus/Angels doing something about it to prevent it.
You'll no doubt remember the story of doubting Thomas - read the words before his actions and you'll see the poor man (according to the Bible) was set up.
Anything which is propheside and comes true is the same sort of measly trick.

[Zigzangle]

Originally Posted by kjw47

If you are correct, then how do you explain the book of revelation is passing before the worlds eyes? Written over 1900 years ago. Yet few can see the reality of it. Because FEW actually listen to Jesus.

Revelation is a book of fiction, which some just love to interpret in the craziest of ways, to suit their take on faith. Apparently Revelation was nearly not included among the documents making up the Bible.

[Amilius777]

Molearner-

I actually believe that. I was mainly focusing on a logical historical perspective.

But I personally believe John's Gospel was written by a greater Clairvoyant than the other three authors. I don't think the author of John really cared about historical concrete facts he was mainly getting to the crux of who Christ was- "The Divine presence tabernacle in a human form"

I've had a few prophetic dreams, experiences with Spirits, some ghost experiences, and even had my past lives read to me which felt pretty accurate to my personality. For me it isn't a great leap of faith. I just know the Gospel authors were Clairvoyants. They may not have been Eye witnesses but they were seers who were told to write since the Apostles were already long dead. The 12 Apostles all had their second sight and spiritual gifts opened up by Christ but they never wrote anything down. They spread the word by open mouth and passed down the teachings through communities but they were all put to death. Those within a community who also possessed a spiritual gift for perceiving Truths were basically selected by a group to write these stories down. That is my PERSONAL opinion. Why are there only 4 Gospels which all have the same flavor, similar stories, similar format, etc but all with a different Message or Focus? It isn't a coincidence. They were all inspired by the same Holy Spirit. Now Mark was the oldest and the other 3 Gospels most likely used Mark as a template and began writing their own feelings or views on the story.

John perceived that Jesus wasn't just a holy man and healer who had to die for a substitionary atonement as the messiah. For John, Jesus was the oneness of the Divine and the Human in one person.