Mad, bad,or the Son of God

[Dream]

Originally Posted by Quahom1

Dream, by your own admission, you recognize that Jesus told others who he was...

Why do I feel like I'm in standing in the sea as it draws back to crash overhead? There's this...sucking sound....like hearing a whoosh just before I get smacked.

[Dream]

Originally Posted by seattlegal

Isn't that what they tried to do to Jeremiah when he called for the evil-doers to repent, and warned about the destruction of the Temple? In Jeremiah's case, Ahikam son of Shaphan stood up for Jeremiah.(Jeremiah 26) Jesus did the same in calling the evil-doers to repent and warning about the destruction of the Temple. (Matt 23 & 24) In Jesus's case, Pilate would not stand up to the crowd who had been persuaded by the priests to rally for the release of Barabbas instead of Jesus. (Matt 27)

You would think that one of the scholars would have seen the parallel?

Probably there were scholars who saw the parallel but who did not have the final word on whether or not to listen to Jesus. (There are lots of theories about it.) The chapter you mentioned in Jeremiah talks about how the prophet has to be accepted by the leader who is reigning at the time, and the city lives or dies by the decision of that leader. Jer 26:17 Then rose up certain of the elders of the land, and spake to all the assembly of the people, saying,....

The elders discussed two previous prophets that spoke against the kings of Jerusalem: One prophet was Micah the Morasthite who spoke to king Hezekiah, a king who listened and repented, which moved God to postpone a sentence against Jerusalem. Second was Urijah the son of Shemaiah of Kirjathjearim who spoke unsuccessfully to king Jehoiakim. Jehoiakim sent assassins to Egypt, and they sword-killed Urijah and would not even give him the honor of a prophet's burial. In each case, as well as in Jeremiah's case, the decision to receive the prophet did not fall to the common people or even scholars but to the leadership.

[Quahom1]

Originally Posted by Dream

Why do I feel like I'm in standing in the sea as it draws back to crash overhead? There's this...sucking sound....like hearing a whoosh just before I get smacked.

No lol, no surf and turf.

[Dream]

The 3XL argument is missing a ka-chunk of logic. It assumes that since he claimed to be Son of God, he was either Lord, liar, or lunatic -- which skirts the question of what he was claiming to be! The question people want answered when they buy the book is 'what did Jesus claim'. The answer the book gives is 'since Jesus was claiming to be God, then of course we weigh his honesty to consider it'. That isn't the question people are asking. The answer the books give is 'Shut up and quit thinking about it.' Even worse, its often the only sort of book available on the topic in Christian bookstores or even secular ones. The book and the argument pit the integrity of Jesus against an assumption -- really an accusation. Why not address the real question? Why didn't Josh McDowell and CS Lewis want to address it? The same reason I don't want to -- there's no money in it and people don't like reading about in posts, either.

[juantoo3]

Because it casts doubt on almost two thousand years of institutionalized credibility.

Truth and fact are seldom the same. When it comes to religion, truth and fact are almost never the same. What they did not want to address, in my opinion, is having to square the historic person of Yashua with the mythos of Jesus.

[Dream]

Originally Posted by Juantoo3

What they did not want to address, in my opinion, is having to square the historic person of Yashua with the mythos of Jesus.

Juantoo3, Now is when historical facts are coming to light and we have no choice but to assimilate them. Don't give up on your research! Although it is unnecessary for Christians to argue over doctrines it is a necessity to have an answer for those who ask what happened. Historical digging is not a hobby. It is a fight for the sake of the future, and forgetfulness buries living generations to hide ghosts. You know -- history repeating itself when we forget it, etc.

[wil]

Originally Posted by Dream

... which skirts the question of what he was claiming to be! The question people want answered when they buy the book is 'what did Jesus claim'. ....

the reason there is a debate, has been a debate for 2000 years and will continue to be a debate is there is no first hand writings, ie eyewitness testimony, there is no writings of Jesus, as learned as the books claim he was he left us nothing. What we are left with are contradictory third, fourth and n+1 handwritings and interpretations...hence the discussion.

Believers believe. NonBelievers don't. Seekers question. Theologians debate, discuss.

[Quahom1]

Originally Posted by wil

the reason there is a debate, has been a debate for 2000 years and will continue to be a debate is there is no first hand writings, ie eyewitness testimony, there is no writings of Jesus, as learned as the books claim he was he left us nothing. What we are left with are contradictory third, fourth and n+1 handwritings and interpretations...hence the discussion.

Believers believe. NonBelievers don't. Seekers question. Theologians debate, discuss.

There is nothing written that we are aware of...that doesn't mean nothing exists.

Look at what Brown's book "Da Vinci Code" did, and it was part fact, part fiction?

Imagine what would happen if Jesus' had writings that were validated? No matter which way you look at it, a lot of people would have their entire belief systems thrown into chaos.

[earl]

What I now conjecture was that Jesus was neither of those 3 per se. Rather, he was a "doorway" to God. Perhaps he was someone who could literally induce in another a truly "mind-blowing" transformation of consciousness and heart which transported them out of their conventional ego-bound views of reality to what may be considered a more direct experience of Divine reality. Perhpas having that ability he represented a threat to the then entrenched religious authority structure which worked in consort with Roman occupation to maintain the socio-political order of the day. Perhaps that religious structure was threatened by someone who preached and supported others to have a direct personal connection to their Divine nature which may have both undermined the standard religious interpetations of that structure as well as the personal power of those leading that structure. Perhaps he truly was a bridge, doorway, "Way" to God in that sense. Perhaps he still is. Of course, even given that, "what" he is/was still essentially is sort of a Christian koan then. Earl

[seattlegal]

Originally Posted by earl

What I now conjecture was that Jesus was neither of those 3 per se. Rather, he was a "doorway" to God. Perhaps he was someone who could literally induce in another a truly "mind-blowing" transformation of consciousness and heart which transported them out of their conventional ego-bound views of reality to what may be considered a more direct experience of Divine reality. Perhpas having that ability he represented a threat to the then entrenched religious authority structure which worked in consort with Roman occupation to maintain the socio-political order of the day. Perhaps that religious structure was threatened by someone who preached and supported others to have a direct personal connection to their Divine nature which may have both undermined the standard religious interpetations of that structure as well as the personal power of those leading that structure. Perhaps he truly was a bridge, doorway, "Way" to God in that sense. Perhaps he still is. Of course, even given that, "what" he is/was still essentially is sort of a Christian koan then. Earl

Perhaps. However, you know which category of the thread title those of us who contemplate koans are usually labeled with....

[earl]

Originally Posted by seattlegal

Perhaps. However, you which category of the thread title those of us who contemplate koans are usually labeled with....

Huh? Not following you there Seattle. earl

[seattlegal]

Originally Posted by earl

Huh? Not following you there Seattle. earl

**slaps earl acrossed the face with a fish**


Actually, contemplating the trinity makes a very fine koan. Most call it a 'mystery' instead of a koan, though.

[Dream]

perhaps how ever you which category of the thread title those of us who contemplate koans are usually labeled with ...

<<===<<< Switcharoo >>>===>>

Koans are perhaps of the category of thread which you contemplate with us usually labeled those who title, however of ....

[seattlegal]

Originally Posted by Dream

perhaps how ever you know which category of the thread title those of us who contemplate koans are usually labeled with ...

<<===<<< Switcharoo >>>===>>

Koans are perhaps of the category of thread which you contemplate with us usually labeled those who title, however of ....

Jesus often spoke in parables that needed to be contemplated in order to be understood. Many people left off following him because they thought he was mad because of them. (The part about them needing to eat his flesh and drink his blood comes to mind.)

[earl]

Originally Posted by seattlegal

Jesus often spoke in parables that needed to be contemplated in order to be understood. Many people left off following him because they thought he was mad because of them. (The part about them needing to eat his flesh and drink his blood comes to mind.)

Given my earlier frame of reference, how I look at this eucharistic notion is that "to eat his flesh and drink his blood" was to fully allow oneself to be engulfed by the essence that was Jesus-in a sense letting his influence into one's being and in doing so one's mind-heart limitations are truly emptied out revealing our true Divine home and destiny which had always been there awaiting us but to which we are typically blind. Earl