(10-07-2013, 02:37 PM)jivatman Wrote: Gemini, is it is clear to all objective historians that Jesus did not consider himself divine.
Of the four gospels the first three; Matthew, Mark, and Luke are called by historians the synoptic gospels. [0]. That is because they have a high degree of consistency between them and are the earliest and most authentic portrait of Jesus as a Jewish reformer.
The fourth, much later Gospel, John is, as any historian will tell you, presents a portrait which is not reconcilable with the synoptics: It contains no parables, Jesus speaks constantly the first person using "I AM", and of course claims to be god. It is essentially irreconcilable [1]
Wikipedia: "Critical scholars doubt that the historical Jesus actually made these sweeping claims." [2]
If being saved through the divinity of Jesus was to be the central point in Christianity, why is this not mentioned once in any of the three Synoptic Gospels, let alone containing many phrases that flatly contradict it?, such as Luke 18:18[3]
Yes, and let's also remember that the books of the bible, like all other mythological and spiritual texts from other cultures, like the Bhagavad Gita, etc. - were all written by men. Ancient, primitive men. Humans. People have been brainwashed into believing that the bible is 'the word of God' but who decided that? Men.
(10-07-2013, 02:47 PM)Gemini Wolf Wrote: In the Christian funeral, they kept talking about how the lady that passed would see Jesus' face radiant like the sun.
Maybe she will, if that is her perception of God.
But keep in the mind, that the same Christians who said that, probably also believe that about 80% of the world's population will burn in 'hell' forever just because they have different beliefs. They also believe that God is angry, vengeful, and violent. (old testament) Those same people are the ones trying to scare others into joining their religion. "Convert or go to hell!" Bleh! That sounds pretty STS to me, those tactics. They have good intentions, generally, but the whole idea of believing a certain way just because some other humans said to, out of fear of going to hell, just doesn't work for me.
So really, I would take anything they say with a grain of salt. Jesus was cool. His teachings about love, peace, and forgiveness are good to follow. (Whether he actually said all that stuff or not, is irrelevant, in my opinion, because it's obviously good stuff. The part about forgiveness is really profound, and in alignment with the Law of One, so it makes sense to me that it would have come from a very advanced Master.)
But the rest of the bible, in my opinion, doesn't even measure up to basic human decency. The old testament is full of vile things. How people believe that is from 'God' I cannot understand.
My point is that the Bible is just like any other book. If you resonate with parts of it, then fine, but I am suggesting that allowing other people to frighten you into accepting that particular book above all others might not be the best way to decide what you wish to believe.
Note: I apologize for the generalization. It's not my intention to pigeonhole everyone in the Christian religion. I'm speaking of the basic beliefs of heaven/hell/Jesus saves/other religions are wrong stuff that is pretty standard in most versions of Christianity. There are exceptions, of course, like the mystical versions such as Gnostic Christianity, and Universalist Christianity, etc. I'm referring to fundamentalist Christianity here.