Jesus not a unique suffering Messiah - PeachParts Mercedes-Benz Forum

kerry · #1 07-10-2008, 04:36 PM

A OT scholar just linked me to this piece. It could have quite significant implications:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/06/world/middleeast/06stone.html?pagewanted=1&_r=2&sq=Ancient%20%20Tablet%20Ignites&st=nyt&scp=1

aklim · #2 07-10-2008, 04:47 PM

Question. Assuming it is real. If you gave your life for a cause, it might make you a somebody. However, if you could give your life knowing that you won't die from it, what does that make you? It is one thing for me to give everything I own to charity. However, If I know that what I gave I would immediately get back, what is the worth of my action?

cudaspaz · #3 07-10-2008, 06:06 PM

It's another thing to be the son of God that died so that we may live.

John 3:16.

aklim · #4 07-10-2008, 06:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by cudaspaz

It's another thing to be the son of God that died so that we may live.

John 3:16.

How so? Assuming he was real, he didn't really give up his life since he knew he could not die.

RichC · #5 07-10-2008, 06:25 PM

.

The death and resurrection theme is more common than not in most forms
of myth / religion.

From the ancient Egyptian god named Sol , I think it was.
All the way up to Jesus.

....

The death and resurrection theme was stolen from astronomy/astrology.

Starting on December 22 the sun in the northern hemisphere seems to
stand still for three days just below the horizon.
And on the third day it returns into sight.

The three stars slightly northeast of the rising sun point directly
to where the sun will rise on the third day.
AKA the three wise men from the east.

It is the same thing with most other Christian holidays.
They were mostly stolen from earlier beliefs.
Pagans worship trees.
Thats why we have the christmas tree.

The list goes on and on...

RichC

.

chetwesley · #6 07-10-2008, 06:43 PM

Of course you know religion and politics are the two things which inflame people the most, so I am reluctant to get into this, but it is my personal opinion that Jesus's life represented something which is timeless. There are many others who lived similar lives, to a greater or lesser degree - for example, Krishna
http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_jckr1.htm

It is hard to look at the Jesus story objectively because of facts getting lost in time and because of how people have taken the story and bent it to mean what they want to believe it means over time.

Imagine if we could just take the story of Jesus's life, and the things he is claimed to have said, as is with no religious (or anti-religious) belief or stimulus attached to it, like we can with the ancient Greek or Roman myths, or like people do with the sayings of the Buddha. We could probably get more out of it.

RichC · #7 07-10-2008, 08:32 PM

.

^^^^^^^^

I agree whole heartedly.
There is much to learn from many faiths.

Just so you guys know.
I am anti organized religion.

But not anti spiritual.
Or anti higher power / god.

.....

Q: Why don't dogs talk ?

A: Because they are smarter than we are.

.....

RichC

.

MS Fowler · #8 07-10-2008, 08:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RichC

.

The death and resurrection theme is more common than not in most forms
of myth / religion.

From the ancient Egyptian god named Sol , I think it was.
All the way up to Jesus.

....

The death and resurrection theme was stolen from astronomy/astrology.

Starting on December 22 the sun in the northern hemisphere seems to
stand still for three days just below the horizon.
And on the third day it returns into sight.

The three stars slightly northeast of the rising sun point directly
to where the sun will rise on the third day.
AKA the three wise men from the east.

It is the same thing with most other Christian holidays.
They were mostly stolen from earlier beliefs.
Pagans worship trees.
Thats why we have the christmas tree.

The list goes on and on...

RichC

.

There is NO biblical reference to "three wise men from the east"

You, and others, need to be more careful in reading the Bible if you are going to criticize it.

MS Fowler · #9 07-10-2008, 08:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chetwesley

Of course you know religion and politics are the two things which inflame people the most, so I am reluctant to get into this, but it is my personal opinion that Jesus's life represented something which is timeless. There are many others who lived similar lives, to a greater or lesser degree - for example, Krishna
http://www.religioustolerance.org/chr_jckr1.htm

It is hard to look at the Jesus story objectively because of facts getting lost in time and because of how people have taken the story and bent it to mean what they want to believe it means over time.

Imagine if we could just take the story of Jesus's life, and the things he is claimed to have said, as is with no religious (or anti-religious) belief or stimulus attached to it, like we can with the ancient Greek or Roman myths, or like people do with the sayings of the Buddha. We could probably get more out of it.

This is another popular misconception.
Jesus, if the historical records are to be believed, did not leave you the option of accepting him as a goor moral teacher.
He made specific claims to be God.
He claimed that He was the only way to eternal life.

He was either the Creator-God who was made man, or he was a liar or a lunatic.
CS Lewis said it better than I:

C.S. Lewis 'Mere Christianity' page 56
I am trying here to prevent anyone saying the really foolish thing that people often say about Him: "I'm ready to accept Jesus as a great moral teacher, but I don't accept his claim to be God." That is the one thing we must not say. A man who was merely a man and said the sort of things Jesus said would not be a good moral teacher. He would either be a lunatic-on a level with the man who says he is a poached egg-or else he would be the Devil of Hell. You must make your choice. Either this man was, and is, the Son of God: or else a madman or something worse. You can shut Him up for a fool, you can spit at Him and kill Him as a demon; or you can fall at His feet and call Him Lord and God. But let us not come with any patronising nonsense about His being a great moral teacher. He has not left that open to us. He did not intend to.

kerry · #10 07-10-2008, 09:38 PM

If the current interpretation of this new find is correct, it raises doubts about Jesus' exclusivity.
It's not very easy to figure out what the NT writers meant by the phrases 'son of man' and 'son of god'. C.S. Lewis's view seems to depend on later theological interpretations of Jesus than those of the gospel writers.

RichC · #11 07-10-2008, 11:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MS Fowler

There is NO biblical reference to "three wise men from the east"

You, and others, need to be more careful in reading the Bible if you are going to criticize it.

.

Did I say it was from the bible ?
NO !

I did not say christmas trees were in the bible either.
But they sure are a part of christmas.

.

You need to be more carefull of criticizing others.

.

RichC · #12 07-11-2008, 12:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by MS Fowler

This is another popular misconception.
Jesus, if the historical records are to be believed, did not leave you the option of accepting him as a goor moral teacher.
He made specific claims to be God.
He claimed that He was the only way to eternal life.

He was either the Creator-God who was made man, or he was a liar or a lunatic.
CS Lewis said it better than I:

C.S. Lewis 'Mere Christianity' page 56
I am trying here to prevent anyone saying the really foolish thing that people often say about Him: "I'm ready to accept Jesus as a great moral teacher, but I don't accept his claim to be God." That is the one thing we must not say. A man who was merely a man and said the sort of things Jesus said would not be a good moral teacher. He would either be a lunatic-on a level with the man who says he is a poached egg-or else he would be the Devil of Hell. You must make your choice. Either this man was, and is, the Son of God: or else a madman or something worse. You can shut Him up for a fool, you can spit at Him and kill Him as a demon; or you can fall at His feet and call Him Lord and God. But let us not come with any patronising nonsense about His being a great moral teacher. He has not left that open to us. He did not intend to.

This argument makes about as much sense if you substituted the word
Santa Clause for Jesus.

Of course there is all sorts of room between being a lunatic and god.
And one of the spots in between is a teacher.

There is no way that the bible can be a factual account of history.
Not possible.
You cannot literally interpret all that the bible says and come up with
any kind of coherent way to live your life.

Even the 10 commandments are absolutely impossible for even one
human being to adhere to, let alone all men.

You simply must see the stories of the bible as metaphors written to
teach moral stories.
At least if you plan to keep your sanity for very long.

RichC

.

aklim · #13 07-11-2008, 12:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by kerry

If the current interpretation of this new find is correct, it raises doubts about Jesus' exclusivity.
It's not very easy to figure out what the NT writers meant by the phrases 'son of man' and 'son of god'. C.S. Lewis's view seems to depend on later theological interpretations of Jesus than those of the gospel writers.

Is it important that Jesus be exclusive in that "club"? Assuming it is all true, isn't the message more important that him being exclusive or that he shares the spot with a couple other people?

aklim · #14 07-11-2008, 12:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RichC

You simply must see the stories of the bible as metaphors written to teach moral stories. At least if you plan to keep your sanity for very long.

Better way to keep one's sanity. Forget about the whole story and get on with life.

kerry · #15 07-11-2008, 09:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aklim

Is it important that Jesus be exclusive in that "club"? Assuming it is all true, isn't the message more important that him being exclusive or that he shares the spot with a couple other people?

Jesus' exclusivity is only important if people take it to be important. C.S. Lewis seems to think its important. To me, it's not that significant, except insofar as we are trying to figure out who Jesus was in his historical context.

It's not entirely clear to me what Jesus' message is and even less clear if it's important. I was asking my sister-in-law last week what was so significant about Jesus. She thought his healing miracles were pretty important. I don't see their relevance. Even if Jesus was performing miracles today, I'd still prefer to visit a doctor over a miracle worker.