Elevation of Christ, Jesus

[barney]

When Jesus returned to Nazereth in his Son-of-God mode, the people started saying "Who is that? Isnt it the son of Joseph the carpenter? Why is he saying such things?"

As I have posted before, suddenly after 29 years of just being a standard Chippy and Odd-Job guy in a small, and probably very dull, town in the provinces, he announced he was actually the creator of the entire universe, was everlasting and had always been.

To make people swallow that must have been an incredible, nay Miraculous, undertaking.

 

[Umar001]

When Jesus returned to Nazereth in his Son-of-God mode, the people started saying "Who is that? Isnt it the son of Joseph the carpenter? Why is he saying such things?"

As I have posted before, suddenly[/U] after 29 years of just being a standard Chippy and Odd-Job guy in a small, and probably very dull, town in the provinces, he announced he was actually the creator of the entire universe, was everlasting and had always been.

To make people swallow that must have been an incredible, nay Miraculous, undertaking.

How do you know it was sudden, or that he was virtually quiet before 20 or so...

 

[barney]

There is no record. If he was preaching or doing miracles or saying he was the son-of-god, people would have picked up on it.
Theres one mention of the twelve year old running off one day and mum & dad found him in the temple. "You should have known I would be in my fathers house".

If he had done mighty deedz B4 this, the people of his home town wouldnt be complaining that their local carpenters son was saying he was God. They would have heard it before.

 

[Umar001]

There is no record. If he was preaching or doing miracles or saying he was the son-of-god, people would have picked up on it.
Theres one mention of the twelve year old running off one day and mum & dad found him in the temple. "You should have known I would be in my fathers house".

Do all records survive? Meaning could there have been records which were later deemed heretical and thus destroyed? Or even records which we have now which are deemed heretical.

If he had done mighty deedz B4 this, the people of his home town wouldnt be complaining that their local carpenters son was saying he was God. They would have heard it before.

How do you know they complained? Because of the Gospel. Also, maybe they complained because they thought he was working magic instead of using God as a source.

 

[barney]

Do all records survive? Meaning could there have been records which were later deemed heretical and thus destroyed? Or even records which we have now which are deemed heretical.



How do you know they complained? Because of the Gospel. Also, maybe they complained because they thought he was working magic instead of using God as a source.

The only solid evidence that Jesus was a real historical being any more than Oliver Twist is the Bible.
Most Religion's have had a lot of time to wash any laundry. Burning "heretical" works that disagree with the establishment.
Abrogating embarrassing verses.

Why the fantastic record of Jesus's actions from the age of 29 and nothing before? Well because he simply wasnt doing anything before.
If he rebuilt a temple or said a psalm or caused water to turn into cottage cheese, then surely thats important. It would have gone into the book.
It dosnt, this mortal-immortal simply carries on a bog standard life for 29 years then one day, a old woman comes up to the house and asks if Jesus is around, cos he did a really good job on her roof last year so can he fix the broken spoke on her chariot?
"Sorry love...He's not here any more....Turns out he is the alpha and omega, the light everlasting, creator of the universe and God himself who's come to visit us. He's over on the galalee coast walking on water, if your quick he might have a free slot to get it fixed next week"

 

[Umar001]

The only solid evidence that Jesus was a real historical being any more than Oliver Twist is the Bible.

That does not indicate whether the source is strong or not though, sure we can ascertain that there was an individual called Jesus, why else would they write that, but is the image within those Gospels right? That's a different question.

Most Religion's have had a lot of time to wash any laundry. Burning "heretical" works that disagree with the establishment.
Abrogating embarrassing verses.

The problem arises when one cannot tell which is heritical and that which isn't.

Why the fantastic record of Jesus's actions from the age of 29 and nothing before? Well because he simply wasnt doing anything before.
If he rebuilt a temple or said a psalm or caused water to turn into cottage cheese, then surely thats important. It would have gone into the book.

There are other possible reasons, for example, the Oral Tradition which had instances from Jesus' childhood may have been deemed false by those who wrote 'our' Bible.

So for example you get later gospels stating that in his childhood Jesus did x.y.z, are such things from genuine tradition? We cannot know! Imagine we did not have the Gospel of matthew and luke, people would say 'Pffft virgin birth, that only was made up later on!'

You see?

 

[barney]

Heretical is whatever conflicts with the particular schism of the time and location.
Protestant teachings were Heretical; we fought a civil war over it.
Jo Smiths teachings, Arienism, the Libary of alexandria, abrogated Quranic Verses.
All the above show how heresy is a matter of time and place.

 

[Umar001]

Heretical is whatever conflicts with the particular schism of the time and location.
Protestant teachings were Heretical; we fought a civil war over it.
Jo Smiths teachings, Arienism, the Libary of alexandria, abrogated Quranic Verses.
All the above show how heresy is a matter of time and place.

And the question is, what is heretical with regards to the teachings of Jesus?

 

[barney]

That he was an ordinary man. That he had a wife or kids, that he did not preform miracles.

Jesus's Teachings were Heretical to the Jews as he claimed to be the Messiah, the person who signaled the end times. They killed him so that they could prove him wrong, but his followers got around that by the whole Easter Story.
Jesus's Teachings are heretical to the muslims,(as you know) because he said he was the son of god. God has no son...or daughters.

 

[Umar001]

That he was an ordinary man. That he had a wife or kids, that he did not preform miracles.

Jesus's Teachings were Heretical to the Jews as he claimed to be the Messiah, the person who signaled the end times. They killed him so that they could prove him wrong, but his followers got around that by the whole Easter Story.
Jesus's Teachings are heretical to the muslims,(as you know) because he said he was the son of god. God has no son...or daughters.

And the sources of this knowledge you have?

Also, I ask again what is heretical (opposes) the teachings of Jesus? In order to know what opposes his teaching you need to know his teaching, I assume. So that is the question.

 

[barney]

Source is the Bible.


Jesus claims to be the messiah, The jews condem him as a heretic, procecute and have him killed.

I think im missing your point, because you already know that?

Why do I think he is an ordinary man? That could take forever to explain, and tonight ,i'm not up to it, (being rather worse the wear for wine).
If thats what you mean , I'll compile my evidence and post it.

 

[Umar001]

Source is the Bible.

Ok, I'd say, no Jesus did not claim sonship, source Qur'an. We would have to analyse the sources, this is what I mean

Jesus claims to be the messiah, The jews condem him as a heretic, procecute and have him killed.

I think im missing your point, because you already know that?

But what you are taking for granted is the source, you claim this based upon knowledge which is dependent upon a source, now, what I am thinking about is t he reliability of the source.

 

[barney]

Oh the source is fulla holes. I dont beleive 2% of the bible or any other scripture, I was simply saying from a jewish point of veiw he was a Heretic. Their scriptures dont acknowlage him at all, of course.

From a Muslim point of veiw to beleive that he is a deity is heresy. God has no sons, Mohammed transmitted.

Poor old Christians. Nobody else buys into it.
Pretty cool story as well.

 

[Umar001]

Oh the source is fulla holes. I dont beleive 2% of the bible or any other scripture, I was simply saying from a jewish point of veiw he was a Heretic. Their scriptures dont acknowlage him at all, of course.

From a Muslim point of veiw to beleive that he is a deity is heresy. God has no sons, Mohammed transmitted.

Poor old Christians. Nobody else buys into it.
Pretty cool story as well.

Ok, then maybe you can explain why you dont believe that the Bible, more accurately to our discussion the Gospels are not accurate source for the life of Jesus?

 

[ddz]

I beleive that the gospels are a FAIRLY accurate source of Jesus, in the bible, the 4 gospels in order are Matthew Mark Luke and John, but through close examination, we are able to insinuate that Mark was actually the first source, this is because the works of Jesus and his teachings within Mark are carried out through Matthew and Luke pretty much the same. In theory, Matthew and Luke had a new source which scholars beleive to be the 'lost source' popularly called source 'Q' (I dont know why lol) thats why Mark is the shortest of Gospels, and has more simplistic grammer with the continuous use of 'and' to continue on a story. If you examine Luke and Matthew, they are rich in grammer and have seperate stories as well as different eye witness accounts. Sure, there may be a lot of differences and contridictions within the 2 books, and perhaps the book of Mark as well. This is because when Jesus asscended into Heaven, many thought he would appear again, in what they called 'Parousia' meaning second coming. With the mentality that Jesus would re appear once again, many thought that there was no need to write down his life in documents, plus hiring scribes I imagine would have been very expensive. So stories were told through word of mouth. After about 100-200 years after the death of Jesus, people began to document his life because the parousia had not occured as they expected. The books were not written close to each other through time, Mark is estimated to have been written roughly 70-90 years before Matthew and Luke, and Matthew and Luke is beleived to be have written by authors relativley close in time to each other, about 10 years roughly.

Each author is writing to a different type of audience. Matthew wrote for the messianic Jews. Luke wrote for a Gentile and Non Jewish Christian Audience. Mark is beleived to be aimed at a Judeo-Christian audience.

Mark concentrated more on Jesus' Humanity and Divinity. Matthew concentrated on Jesus' Royalty through a jewish Lineage and Bloodline, tracing his roots back to King David. Luke portrayed Jesus coming for everyone both Jews and Non Jews alike.

Now, The elevation of Jesus Christ through the Bible is evident and can be traced back to the Old Testament. He is prophecised in the prophetic books-

Micah 5:1-2 (NIV) Marshal your troops, O city of troops, for a siege is laid against us. They will strike Israel's ruler on the cheek with a rod. 2 "But you, Bethlehem Ephrathah, though you are small among the clans of Judah, out of you will come for me one who will be ruler over Israel, whose origins are from of old, from ancient times."

Deuteronomy 18:18 (NIV) I will raise up for them a prophet like you from among their brothers; I will put my words in his mouth, and he will tell them everything I command him.

Acts 3:20-22 (NIV) and that he may send the Christ, who has been appointed for you--even Jesus. 21 He must remain in heaven until the time comes for God to restore everything, as he promised long ago through his holy prophets. 22 For Moses said, 'The Lord your God will raise up for you a prophet like me from among your own people; you must listen to everything he tells you.

etc etc and I beleive he is elevated within the first three gospels in their own approach.

The book of John however has a Jesus preaching the Logos (The Word) there is no birth of Jesus, nor information on his past life. After the prologue it concentrates on Jesus' Ministry. Jesus is the same person in all 4 Gospels, but the Ethos and Theological emphasis differ.

Christology is made evident within John, and he describes Jesus as the Logos - The Word.. which parallels the book of Genesis and John's Prologue 1:1

Genesis

In the Beginning God created the Heavens and Earth

John

In the beginning there was the Word and the Word was with God

In this context it is clear that Jesus is elevated. Through the Prophets Jesus is made eveident to cause an impact within his time. Over the years there have been different interpretations on Jesus, but his humble and loving qualties stay the same. There are arguments of whether he claimed Divinity, but one cant argue that Jesus has made a huge impact within our lives regardless of religion.

 

[Pygoscelis]

This talk about how Jews regard Jesus reminds me of a conversation I had the other day with a fundamentalist Christian. Fellow hated jews becasue they killed Jesus. He didn't seem to realize that if jews hadn't killed Jesus he'd not have his salvation. Seems to me if anything he should be thanking the Jews for playing their part in bringing him an afterlife off bliss in paradise.

 

[Keltoi]

This talk about how Jews regard Jesus reminds me of a conversation I had the other day with a fundamentalist Christian. Fellow hated jews becasue they killed Jesus. He didn't seem to realize that if jews hadn't killed Jesus he'd not have his salvation. Seems to me if anything he should be thanking the Jews for playing their part in bringing him an afterlife off bliss in paradise.

Any Christian who hates Jews has no idea what their faith is in the first place.

 

[barney]

Ok, then maybe you can explain why you dont believe that the Bible, more accurately to our discussion the Gospels are not accurate source for the life of Jesus?

That could be a long post. But i'll sum it up by saying that the stories of the Apostles contradict each other in many many ways.
Just take the story of the open tomb. We have angels inside, outside, not visable, two of them, one of them. The gaurds are gone, asleep outside, Jesus meets mary outside the garden, then she dosnt.

The Apostles clearly got together after Jesus was killed and decided on a basic story. They diddnt have time to thrash out the details. They stuck in miracles, angels and events as they thought of them, whilst still trying to adhere to the basic story of rising from the dead.

Some speeches and events are clearly based on real events. The entering of jerusalem. There must have been a fair crowd come to see the celebrity. I fear for the palm tree population of Jerusalem if all 30000 each threw down a leaf.
Some not so much:
As Jesus died, hundreds of old dead prophets rose from the graves and wandered about the fully populated city.......for days........And this is mentioned in one place. The Bible, by one person.:?

It's impossible to know what is real and whats not about the life of Jesus. Since so much is clearly falsified by the apostles, I start at 0% and work my way up. Evry apostle says that Jesus preached loving your brother, so thats a safe bet that he said something similar.

Really needs to be made into a "science"!

 

[ddz]

Any Christian who hates Jews has no idea what their faith is in the first place.

Thats true, maybe it could have been that they still dont see Jesus as important or hold his work credible even to this day, and they are still waiting on their messiah to come down and save them.. I dont know if he meant that lool but OMG if he really does hate Jews for killing Jesus thennn... he needs to think long and hard what religion he'd be if it didnt happen

 

[Keltoi]

That could be a long post. But i'll sum it up by saying that the stories of the Apostles contradict each other in many many ways.
Just take the story of the open tomb. We have angels inside, outside, not visable, two of them, one of them. The gaurds are gone, asleep outside, Jesus meets mary outside the garden, then she dosnt.

The Apostles clearly got together after Jesus was killed and decided on a basic story. They diddnt have time to thrash out the details. They stuck in miracles, angels and events as they thought of them, whilst still trying to adhere to the basic story of rising from the dead.

Some speeches and events are clearly based on real events. The entering of jerusalem. There must have been a fair crowd come to see the celebrity. I fear for the palm tree population of Jerusalem if all 30000 each threw down a leaf.
Some not so much:
As Jesus died, hundreds of old dead prophets rose from the graves and wandered about the fully populated city.......for days........And this is mentioned in one place. The Bible, by one person.:?

It's impossible to know what is real and whats not about the life of Jesus. Since so much is clearly falsified by the apostles, I start at 0% and work my way up. Evry apostle says that Jesus preached loving your brother, so thats a safe bet that he said something similar.

Really needs to be made into a "science"!

The Apostles didn't "get together" and create anything. They are separate accounts written years apart relating the same events. The issues surrounding the Resurrection narrative are distinct yet similar on the fundamentals. As the old analogy goes, no two witnesses describe a car accident in the same way. One will concentrate on a particular aspect, while another will focus on a different one.