• Philosophy and Spirituality
    Welcome Guest
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
    Threads of Note Socialize
  • P&S Moderators: Xorkoth | Madness

Was Jesus aware of being Yahweh?

Karamazov said:
we can all throw out random guesses as to who Jesus was and what he believed. But without agreeing on a set of texts it is meaningless. Are you guys talking about the Jesus of the accepted Gospels? Definitely knew he was God. The synoptic gospels? Up for debate and an interesting one at that. The historical Jesus? Something else entirely.

from my experience, most people think of Jesus as kind of harmless nice guy preaching peace and togetherness. A kind of hippy like character. But this character is a simply a modern invention.
Click to expand...

I thought most saw him as a savior that we must believe in to be saved.

If he was just thought of as a hippy, people would not adore him and would criticize some of his more odious and immoral moral tenets.

I think you have missed what the majority think of him.

Regards
DL
 
sonicwhite said:
Jesus took on a man body. For the first time God became both God and man.
Jesus didn’t suffer Hell, rather when He said why have You Father forsaken me He tasted the first time in all eternity what it meant to be separated by God. Hence us humans because of sin.
Click to expand...
Wouldn't Adam be the only human to experience a complete separation from God then? Also, Jesus was supposedly the son of God, not the son of mankind but born of a virgin. These ideas don't add up

Adam was created from the Earth while Jesus was created partly by Heavenly things and birthed by a human woman
 
sonicwhite said:
Jesus took on a man body. For the first time God became both God and man.
Jesus didn’t suffer Hell, rather when He said why have You Father forsaken me He tasted the first time in all eternity what it meant to be separated by God. Hence us humans because of sin.
Click to expand...
this.

Jesus suffered the wrath of the Father for all sins, as only God the Son would be an unblemished blood sacrifice thus ending atonement for sin animal sacrifice (an unblemished lamb). the sins of all men who repent of sin (become moral. before you go there GB) and believe in God the Son are forgiven and will not receive the wrath because it's already been paid.
 
sekio said:
I'm a subscriber to the reductionist belief that Jesus was just some carpenter that got nailed to a cross for telling people to maybe be nice to each other for once.
Click to expand...

I couldn't agree more. Those last words sound like what anyone would say who realizes he's about to die. I don't know if he could realize, in that moment, what his life (and death) would actually signify for years to follow.
 
No, none of this is right. He wasn't human. He was born of a female virgin. Jesus was a hybrid, if he existed at all. Again we're talking about the physical world, not some romantic fantasy world where things just happen how you imagine them
 
Gormur said:
No, none of this is right. He wasn't human. He was born of a female virgin. Jesus was a hybrid, if he existed at all. Again we're talking about the physical world, not some romantic fantasy world where things just happen how you imagine them
Click to expand...

I think the born of a virgin thing is mythology, as is the rising from the dead after 3 days. If he was real, then he was a man who taught some great things about how to treat one another, and everything that sprang up around it after he was killed for preaching those beliefs was modified into a system of social control like all other religions, by those (the Romans) seeking to control a rising tide of followers that threatened to destabilize their rule over the masses. Hence Emperor Constantine officially adopting Christianity as the empire's religion 300 years after Jesus's life, and formalizing it into Catholicism, a guilt-based social control device that bears some resemblance to Jesus's actual teachings, but is really no more than a perversion of those teachings by the very power structure that executed him.
 
I guess I don't get the importance of this supposed person. Maybe I tend to remember people based on what they write rather than biographies
 
So let me get this straight, Jesus (Yahweh) gets innocently crucified, rises from the dead, and ascends to heaven...

What does he do for an encore?
 
ghostandthedarknes said:
this.

Jesus suffered the wrath of the Father for all sins, as only God the Son would be an unblemished blood sacrifice thus ending atonement for sin animal sacrifice (an unblemished lamb). the sins of all men who repent of sin (become moral. before you go there GB) and believe in God the Son are forgiven and will not receive the wrath because it's already been paid.
Click to expand...


LOL.

Let's have one really great blood sacrifice to end all blood sacrifices.

If you are fool enough to believe that a god would end human sacrifice, --- by having one last really good one, --- you show how deranged your thingking is.

Why are you trying to make Jesus into an immoral law breaker?

On Jesus dying for you.

It takes quite an inflated ego to think a god would actually die for you, after condemning you unjustly in the first place.

You have swallowed a lie and don’t care how evil you make Jesus to keep your feel good get out of hell free card.

It is a lie, first and foremost because, like it or not, having another innocent person suffer or die for the wrongs you have done, --- so that you might escape responsibility for having done them, --- is immoral. To abdicate your personal responsibility for your actions or use a scapegoat is immoral.

You also have to ignore what Jesus, as a Jewish Rabbi, would have taught his people.

Ezekiel 18:20 The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him.

Deuteronomy 24:16 (ESV) "Fathers shall not be put to death because of their children, nor shall children be put to death because of their fathers. Each one shall be put to death for his own sin.

Psa 49;7 None of them can by any means redeem his brother, nor give to God a ransom for him:

There is no way that you would teach your children to use a scapegoat to escape their just punishments and here you are doing just that.

Jesus is just a smidge less immoral than his demiurge genocidal father, and here you are trying to put him as low in moral fibre as Yahweh.

Regards
DL
 
Gnostic Bishop said:
LOL.

Let's have one really great blood sacrifice to end all blood sacrifices.

If you are fool enough to believe that a god would end human sacrifice, --- by having one last really good one, --- you show how deranged your thingking is.

Why are you trying to make Jesus into an immoral law breaker?

On Jesus dying for you.

It takes quite an inflated ego to think a god would actually die for you, after condemning you unjustly in the first place.

You have swallowed a lie and don’t care how evil you make Jesus to keep your feel good get out of hell free card.

It is a lie, first and foremost because, like it or not, having another innocent person suffer or die for the wrongs you have done, --- so that you might escape responsibility for having done them, --- is immoral. To abdicate your personal responsibility for your actions or use a scapegoat is immoral.

You also have to ignore what Jesus, as a Jewish Rabbi, would have taught his people.

Ezekiel 18:20 The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him.

Deuteronomy 24:16 (ESV) "Fathers shall not be put to death because of their children, nor shall children be put to death because of their fathers. Each one shall be put to death for his own sin.

Psa 49;7 None of them can by any means redeem his brother, nor give to God a ransom for him:

There is no way that you would teach your children to use a scapegoat to escape their just punishments and here you are doing just that.

Jesus is just a smidge less immoral than his demiurge genocidal father, and here you are trying to put him as low in moral fibre as Yahweh.

Regards
DL
Click to expand...
tldr
 
The thing that bothers me about the whole "Jesus died for the salvation of humanity" is, well, there's two things.
I struggle to see the connection between a 2000 year old carpenter's death on a hill in the Middle East and the moral choices of the other est. 100+ billion people? Even if we adjust that to only people living since approx. 1 AD, that's still 60 billion people.
Why Jesus in particular? If you discount the explanation that he was in direct communication with a higher power, isn't it a bit strange to assume one person's death can somehow excuse the malicious acts of the literal rest of the world? Seems a little juvenile to me at best, and a way to shirk any responsibility at worst (live a life as a sinner, have a deathbed conversion, and by some churches you're heavenbound!)
Was Jesus and the gospels maybe doing a littel nose candy while writing the Good Book?
 
It wasn't just Jesus, it was an entire church that managed to do a very remarkable thing, make Judaism a Gentile religion. Think about it, the early Church Fathers were very intelligent people who knew exactly what they were doing, and had the intelligence and skills to pull it off. They created a religion that can be transmitted and connect people worldwide.
 
What bugs me is why Christians emphasize what happened at Jesus' death but rarely talk about the Old Testament

This is something that used to happen more in churches but nowadays it's all about getting saved, so who cares? Who cares about going to a church where all they do is try to save people? I certainly don't see the appeal or wisdom gained from that experience even though I've already been forced to live through it

Let's talk about Satan in the beginning, when he roamed the Earth and wreaked havoc. I would sit in for at least a sermon and I don't even believe in it
 
sekio said:
The thing that bothers me about the whole "Jesus died for the salvation of humanity" is, well, there's two things.
I struggle to see the connection between a 2000 year old carpenter's death on a hill in the Middle East and the moral choices of the other est. 100+ billion people? Even if we adjust that to only people living since approx. 1 AD, that's still 60 billion people.
Why Jesus in particular? If you discount the explanation that he was in direct communication with a higher power, isn't it a bit strange to assume one person's death can somehow excuse the malicious acts of the literal rest of the world? Seems a little juvenile to me at best, and a way to shirk any responsibility at worst (live a life as a sinner, have a deathbed conversion, and by some churches you're heavenbound!)
Was Jesus and the gospels maybe doing a littel nose candy while writing the Good Book?
Click to expand...

GHe had to be high on something because as a Jewish Rabbi, he preached a lot of Jewish law against us abdicating our responsibility.

I have the following I give Christians to have them think of that but all they do is run away, which is standard the moment anyone askes them to debate or discuss morals.

Perhaps it is just badly written. As a moral man, you might opine on how I can make it more inviting to the moral cowards that run from it.

--------

On Jesus dying for you.

It takes quite an inflated ego to think a god would actually die for you, after condemning you unjustly in the first place.

You have swallowed a lie and don’t care how evil you make Jesus to keep your feel good get out of hell free card.

It is a lie, first and foremost because, like it or not, having another innocent person suffer or die for the wrongs you have done, --- so that you might escape responsibility for having done them, --- is immoral. To abdicate your personal responsibility for your actions or use a scapegoat is immoral.

You also have to ignore what Jesus, as a Jewish Rabbi, would have taught his people.

Ezekiel 18:20 The soul that sinneth, it shall die. The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father, neither shall the father bear the iniquity of the son: the righteousness of the righteous shall be upon him, and the wickedness of the wicked shall be upon him.

Deuteronomy 24:16 (ESV) "Fathers shall not be put to death because of their children, nor shall children be put to death because of their fathers. Each one shall be put to death for his own sin.

Psa 49;7 None of them can by any means redeem his brother, nor give to God a ransom for him:

There is no way that you would teach your children to use a scapegoat to escape their just punishments and here you are doing just that.

Jesus is just a smidge less immoral than his demiurge genocidal father, and here you are trying to put him as low in moral fibre as Yahweh.

Regards
DL
 
The Axe said:
It wasn't just Jesus, it was an entire church that managed to do a very remarkable thing, make Judaism a Gentile religion. Think about it, the early Church Fathers were very intelligent people who knew exactly what they were doing, and had the intelligence and skills to pull it off. They created a religion that can be transmitted and connect people worldwide.
Click to expand...

Indeed, and sent their inquisition out to connect with those they did not murder.

When you have no decent moral arguments to convert with, murder is a great way to convert. Right?

The U.S. is the most Christian country on earth, I think.

Guess how they express their great moral arguments?

With a military that is what, 6 times bigger than anyone else's.

How many/few U.S. presidents have not used it to further great diplomatic talks?

Bush even said that god told him to go into Iraq.

Stupid is as stupid does.

Regards
DL
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top