PDA

View Full Version : Jesus, Son of Mary, Never Claimed Divinity - Proof From The Gospels



Oasis
10-09-16, 23:40
There is no doubt that in gospel of John, the fourth gospel, the Jewish Rabbi Yehoshua, known as Jesus, understands himself to be god and explicitly calls himself divine. According to that gospel Jesus allegedly says "I am the way, the truth and the life, no one comes to the father but by me". But he also says "I and the Father are one; before Abraham was, I am".. These are sayings of Jesus found only in Gospel of John. Jesus calls himself god in the gospel of John, the latest of our gospels, but what is striking is that he never calls himself god in Mark, Mathew or Luke, our earliest gospels. I am absolutely certain Jesus never said these things. And so far as I know, either does any other critical biblical scholar. There are hundreds of biblical scholars but there is no scholar of the gospel of John except for extremely conservative evangelicals or fundamentalists who think that the author of gospel of John accurately records all of the words of Jesus. If you think he does; if you think Jesus did go around Galilee and Jerusalem calling himself god, I'd like you to explain to us on historical, not theological ground, but historical grounds how Rabbi Jesus managed to escape getting stoned to death for blasphemy. And more important, how it is that Mark, Mathew and Luke don't record Jesus calling himself god! That seems like an important point. Did they just forget to mention that part?

Twilight
11-09-16, 01:13
There is no doubt that in gospel of John, the fourth gospel, the Jewish Rabbi Yehoshua, known as Jesus, understands himself to be god and explicitly calls himself divine. According to that gospel Jesus allegedly says "I am the way, the truth and the life, no one comes to the father but by me". But he also says "I and the Father are one; before Abraham was, I am".. These are sayings of Jesus found only in Gospel of John. Jesus calls himself god in the gospel of John, the latest of our gospels, but what is striking is that he never calls himself god in Mark, Mathew or Luke, our earliest gospels. I am absolutely certain Jesus never said these things. And so far as I know, either does any other critical biblical scholar. There are hundreds of biblical scholars but there is no scholar of the gospel of John except for extremely conservative evangelicals or fundamentalists who think that the author of gospel of John accurately records all of the words of Jesus. If you think he does; if you think Jesus did go around Galilee and Jerusalem calling himself god, I'd like you to explain to us on historical, not theological ground, but historical grounds how Rabbi Jesus managed to escape getting stoned to death for blasphemy. And more important, how it is that Mark, Mathew and Luke don't record Jesus calling himself god! That seems like an important point. Did they just forget to mention that part?

Depends on what sub-religion of Christianity that you are referring too. But yes I agree, there are some discrepancies. Back during biblical times, learning how to write and read was only for the wealthy but since prehistoric times Humans have been passing down oral history so you get a "telephone game" effect.

Oasis
11-09-16, 02:06
I am referring to mainstream Christianity. If we want to know what Jesus said and did, we are limited to these four gospels only. Paul virtually says nothing about what Jesus said and did, and likewise the other epistles. But these four canonical gospels, as you mentioned, are filled with discrepancies, historical mistakes, errors, stories that have been changed and changed again..

Twilight
11-09-16, 04:16
I am referring to mainstream Christianity. If we want to know what Jesus said and did, we are limited to these four gospels only. Paul virtually says nothing about what Jesus said and did, and likewise the other epistles. But these four canonical gospels, as you mentioned, are filled with discrepancies, historical mistakes, errors, stories that have been changed and changed again..

Makes sense, as far as settings and environment goes perhaps we could start by exploring the archeology sites of Jesus' supposed travels and campouts like Nazareth https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nazareth


http://www.allaboutjesuschrist.org/where-was-jesus-crucified-faq.htm

Oasis
12-09-16, 16:29
Makes sense, as far as settings and environment goes perhaps we could start by exploring the archeology sites of Jesus' supposed travels and campouts like Nazareth

Here is a really good discussion on why Jesus is not god by a former Christian Youth Minister


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pCuxnu_IGUk

LeBrok
12-09-16, 17:17
Here is a really good discussion on why Jesus is not god by a former Christian Youth Minister

The answer is simpler than you think. Because God doesn't exist.
I'm sure you don't agree with it. You are a spiritual person anyway and sort of conspiracy theorist, right?

Oasis
12-09-16, 18:29
The answer is simpler than you think. Because God doesn't exist.
I'm sure you don't agree with it. You are a spiritual person anyway and sort of conspiracy theorist, right?
Sure he does exist. You know that, too, but that is the discussion of a different topic.

Yetos
12-09-16, 19:00
οκ

I think we are reviving the old argue, that led to wars, etc etc

back to ΜΟΝΟΦΥΣΙΤΙΣΜΟΣ NΕΣΤΟΡΙΑΝΙΣΜΟΣ ΑΡΕΙΑΝΙΣΜΟΣ ΧΑΛΚΗΔΟΝΙΟΙ ΚΟΠΤΙΚΙΣΜΟΣ ΓΝΩΣΤΙΚΟΙ
Monophysitism Chalkedonianism Areianism Nestorians Coptisism Gnostics etc etc.

Sile
12-09-16, 20:08
I am referring to mainstream Christianity. If we want to know what Jesus said and did, we are limited to these four gospels only. Paul virtually says nothing about what Jesus said and did, and likewise the other epistles. But these four canonical gospels, as you mentioned, are filled with discrepancies, historical mistakes, errors, stories that have been changed and changed again..

Latest chit-chat on Jesus by scholars in 2015 is that he was a Gentile ( ex-jew) who married a pagan Phoenician priestess called Mary and he was prophet.
called son of God..........but any prophet was called son of God .....................it was the commencement of gender inequality by religious institutions . Before this the majority of Dieties in the middle-east and europe had female forms .............IIRC , they have found a few thousand of these forms in the areas I noted.

Angela
12-09-16, 20:32
Which scholars? Biblical archaeology and scholarship is quite a thing with me and I've never seen a reknowned serious scholar from a university propose such a thing.

Dan Brown or random people putting videos up on youtube don't qualify as scholars, you know.

That would be quite a feat, by the way, since there were no Phoenicians left, male of female...

This is what happens when people get their ideas from movies and paperback novels.

See:
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2004/02/0225_040225_davincicode.html (http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2004/02/0225_040225_davincicode.html)

Oasis is correct to this extent: there is extremely little documentary evidence about any aspect of Jesus' life other than what is in the Bible. If you want to believe the canonical books over the "lost" gnostic type gospels, or vice versa, you're free to do so, although it's clear to anyone with some knowledge of Jewish life and religion at the time which would be more likely to be true.

Yetos
12-09-16, 21:00
well there is a theory that Jesus was Caesarion, hidden in Judea,

Oasis
12-09-16, 21:04
Which scholars? Biblical archaeology and scholarship is quite a thing with me and I've never seen a reknowned serious scholar from a university propose such a thing.

Dan Brown or random people putting videos up on youtube don't qualify as scholars, you know.

That would be quite a feat, by the way, since there were no Phoenicians left, male of female...

This is what happens when people get their ideas from movies and paperback novels.

because you don't know these scholars doesn't mean they don't exist. In fact, in the last 30-40 years or so a lot of scholarly research have been done on the New Testament studies and many issues about early christianity came into light. Serious researchers don't take Dan Brown and the like seriously. If you do, that would be your problem.

Oasis
12-09-16, 21:07
well there is a theory that Jesus was Caesarion, hidden in Judea,

there may be a lot of theories about Jesus, but there is only one Jesus.

Angela
12-09-16, 21:12
because you don't know these scholars doesn't mean they don't exist. In fact, in the last 30-40 years or so a lot of scholarly research have been done on the New Testament studies and many issues about early christianity came into light. Serious researchers don't take Dan Brown and the like seriously. If you do, that would be your problem.

The following claim was made:
"on Jesus by scholars in 2015 is that he was a Gentile ( ex-jew) who married a pagan Phoenician priestess called Mary"

I asked for their names and qualifications. If they exist that shouldn't be a problem. If no one can provide the names and affiliations of such scholars, then for the purposes of this discussion, the statement shouldn't be given any weight.

Do you have some problem with people supporting their claims with actual evidence?

How else are people supposed to know how much credence to give the claims?

If you think I believe anything said by Dan Brown then you have totally misunderstood what I have posted.

Sile
12-09-16, 21:18
Which scholars? Biblical archaeology and scholarship is quite a thing with me and I've never seen a reknowned serious scholar from a university propose such a thing.

Dan Brown or random people putting videos up on youtube don't qualify as scholars, you know.

That would be quite a feat, by the way, since there were no Phoenicians left, male of female...

This is what happens when people get their ideas from movies and paperback novels.

See:
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2004/02/0225_040225_davincicode.html (http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2004/02/0225_040225_davincicode.html)

Oasis is correct to this extent: there is extremely little documentary evidence about any aspect of Jesus' life other than what is in the Bible. If you want to believe the canonical books over the "lost" gnostic type gospels, or vice versa, you're free to do so, although it's clear to anyone with some knowledge of Jewish life and religion at the time which would be more likely to be true.

not your hero Dan Brown and his fantasies if this is what you believe


Simcha Jacobovici and Barrie Wilson from the Lost Gospel"

of course , all Christians will be brain-washed to deny any ideas that Jesus was married...................are you a christian?

Maleth
12-09-16, 21:21
there may be a lot of theories about Jesus, but there is only one Jesus.

It is also claimed according to the Jewish Talmund that Jesus is the son of a Roman soldier with the name of Panthera.

Angela
12-09-16, 21:25
Did either of you actually read my posts?

Let me make this really simple.

I think Dan Brown is a fraud. So is this screenwriter who wrote a blog post about Jesus and Mary Magdalen which sounds suspiciously like the thesis of your "scholars".

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/simcha-jacobovici/jesus-marriage-to-mary-th_b_6225826.html

It's bunk, and I would be seriously stunned if any serious scholar ever said such a thing.

Are we clear now?

No one, me included, gets to make statements for which there is no factual support.

Maleth
12-09-16, 21:26
I am referring to mainstream Christianity. If we want to know what Jesus said and did, we are limited to these four gospels only. Paul virtually says nothing about what Jesus said and did, and likewise the other epistles. But these four canonical gospels, as you mentioned, are filled with discrepancies, historical mistakes, errors, stories that have been changed and changed again..

Paul never met Jesus in person so he could never be a witness to what Jesus had said. Yet the irony is that Paul of Tarsus is often claimed as the greatest apostle, even though according to tradition he never really was chosen as one by Jesus. In fact the modern Christian church is very Pauline in nature as it was Paul who spread it well beyond were it was born.

Oasis
12-09-16, 21:28
Do you have some problem with people supporting their claims with actual evidence?

How else are people supposed to know how much credence to give the claims?

If you think I believe anything said by Dan Brown then you have totally misunderstood what I have posted.
Not at all. in fact this is what serious researchers go with - evidence. Evidence from the antiquity, evidence from the early Christian writings whether canonical or non-canonical, evidence from inscriptions, personal correspondences among people of early christianity and so on. Evidence is always welcome.

Angela
13-09-16, 03:58
The reason you're not getting much of a response here is because most people are either atheists or agnostics, and they don't much care.

I'll give it a shot on a strictly intellectual levela; not, to be clear, that of a practicing Christian.

I think a strong argument could be made that the words of Jesus, as written by the Gospel writers, do claim divine status for himself. (Of course, if you believe that the original followers made it up, or Mark embellished the original story, that's a different issue. In that case I don't know why you'd care what it says in any of the gospels, canonical or not.)

In order to discuss it, you have to understand what the words "Son of God" meant in the parlance of the day.

"Most scholars agree that "Son of God" is the most important of these titles in Mark.[46] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_of_Mark#cite_note-FOOTNOTETelford199938.E2.80.939-46) It appears on the lips of God himself at the baptism (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Baptism_of_Jesus) and the transfiguration (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Transfiguration_of_Jesus), and is Jesus' own self-designation (Mark 13:32).[46] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_of_Mark#cite_note-FOOTNOTETelford199938.E2.80.939-46) These and other instances provide reliable evidence of how the evangelist perceived Jesus, but it is not clear just what the title meant to Mark and his 1st century audience.[46] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_of_Mark#cite_note-FOOTNOTETelford199938.E2.80.939-46) Where it appears in the Hebrew scriptures it meant Israel as God's people, or the king at his coronation, or angels, as well as the suffering righteous man.[47] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_of_Mark#cite_note-FOOTNOTEDonahue200525-47) In Hellenistic culture the same phrase meant a "divine man", a supernatural being.[46] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_of_Mark#cite_note-FOOTNOTETelford199938.E2.80.939-46) There is little evidence that "son of God" was a title for the messiah in 1st century Judaism, and the attributes which Mark describes in Jesus are much more those of the Hellenistic miracle-working "divine man" than of the Jewish Davidic messiah.[46] (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_of_Mark#cite_note-FOOTNOTETelford199938.E2.80.939-46)

This discussion can be found in the Wiki article on Mark's gospel, the oldest, and thus arguably the closest to the actual events. The links are good and provide more detail.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gospel_of_Mark

Here are some examples of the statements purported to have been made by Jesus:

In the Gospel of Mark, the voice of God is said to have been heard calling Jesus the Son of God when Jesus was baptized by John the Baptist. However, Jesus calls himself that when questioned in the Temple:

Mark 14:61 states that the high priest asked Jesus: "Art thou the Christ, the Son of the Blessed? And Jesus said, "I am", at which the high priest tears his own robe in anger and accuses Jesus of blasphemy.

Likewise, in Matthew 26:63, the high priest asks: Tell us whether you are teh Christ, the Son of God." Jesus answers, "You have said it,prompting the high priest to tear his own robe."

In Like 22:70, when asked "Are you then the Son of God?", Jesus answers "You say that I am", affirming the title Son of God. The priests then say "What further need have we of witnesses, for we ourselves have heard from his own mouth, and they decide to condemn Jesus.

There are numerous other examples, but that should do it.

If you find that persuasive, fine. If you don't find that persuasive, again fine. It's a free country. Believe what you want.

oriental
13-09-16, 04:00
Saul of Tarsus used to persecute the followers of Jesus till he had a dream. The dream of a blanket with lizards appearing on the blanket. Saul saw that as a revelation that gentiles (lizards) should be included. Saul became Paul. He preached to the gentiles against all the other apostles who were attempting to convert Jews to the new faith. I read the Apostles' Letters in case you wonder.

Yetos
13-09-16, 06:56
there may be a lot of theories about Jesus, but there is only one Jesus.

or one Caesarion? :thinking:

Twilight
13-09-16, 07:47
Here is a really good discussion on why Jesus is not god by a former Christian Youth Minister


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pCuxnu_IGUk


The answer is simpler than you think. Because God doesn't exist.
I'm sure you don't agree with it. You are a spiritual person anyway and sort of conspiracy theorist, right?


Sure he does exist. You know that, too, but that is the discussion of a different topic.



Whoa, what commotion did I miss?


Anyways, I maybe a spiritual person myself however it's really up to the person to decide weather God exists. If you believe in a Devine being than more power for you but I'm afraid that is more a matter of faith rather than material evidence.

davef
14-09-16, 05:24
It is also claimed according to the Jewish Talmund that Jesus is the son of a Roman soldier with the name of Panthera.
You mean Pantera? Never really got into that band, I own one album from them but I may be missing a lot. I can't say they're bad, it's just that I haven't given them the same amount of attention I gave other bands. Maybe I should know what I'm missing?