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

Jesus. Could he have been God's son?

IAmJacksUserName

Bluelighter
Joined
Sep 11, 2004
Messages
2,285
Location
Southeast Asia
Before I start, I'd like to say that I'm a skeptic when it comes to the Bible. I was raised Quaker, so I've always been taught to find the truth for myself. I'm anything but a Bible-thumping prick. In fact, I'm hesitant to even call myself a Christian.

That being said, could it be possible that Jesus really was perhaps God's voice (Or "son," as Christians say) on Earth? I don't discount this, and I'll tell you why.

First of all, Jesus was crucified around 33 A.D., according to the best guesses of historians. The gospels were written around 70-80 A.D. That's just a few decades down the road- it would be like writing about Truman now. Generally, for the truth to be distorted into a myth, it takes much longer than that- usually several hundred years. The fact that so little time elapsed suggests to me that the Gospels are a historic record, albeit one shrouded in rumor and urban legends (Especially when you take into account flawed translations and the constant retellings of these stories). I'm not saying that Jesus turned water into wine, but I do feel that his teaching and crucifiction were, for the most part, documented with a fair degree of accuracy.

My second reason may seem a little more far-fetched, as it does even to me, but it's too important to discount. After Jesus's death, something had to have happened. Something big. Afterall, why would Jesus's disciples, all of who were just common shmucks, feel so compelled to return after his supposed resurrection to spread the word of the Gospels? The fact they did so is undeniable- that's how Christianity spread. It must have been something that was powerful to them that compelled them to do it. Is it possible that, just maybe it was a supernatural occurence (i.e. a resurrection) that made them do so?

My third reason is as follows. Jesus pretty much threw much of the Old Testament out the window. He advocated love and forgiveness, tolerance, and preached against eye-for-an-eye, even while the people of his time seemed to be at odds with these teachings. Nevertheless, people of Jesus's day listened to him in a time that contradicted his values, and they went on to worship him even after most of them reverted back to intolerance and eye-for-an-eye. (Crusades anyone?) I can't help but wonder if Jesus had a divine force about him that make people feel compelled to "follow him", even if they don't really follow his teachings, as I still see today in much of the contemporary Christian right.

Once again, I'm not saying this as an advocate for Christianity. All I am is one guy looking for truth, and right now, I'm finding myself wondering about these things. I don't consider myself a believer in the Bible- frankly it scares me. What I definitely believe, however, is that Jesus was a brilliant moral philosopher, who taught us important lessons, that are still important to follow today, on how to treat our fellow human beings. Whether or not there even is a god doesn't change this for me.
 
Last edited:
Being charasmatic and a good leader doesn't necessarily make a person the son of god.

What I definitely believe, however, is that Jesus was a brilliant moral philosopher, who taught us important lessons, that are still important to follow today, on how to treat our fellow human beings.

sounds good to me :)
 
IAmJacksUserName, I give you props, you appear to approach this topic without snide or prejudice, a rarity these days.

IAmJacksUserName said:
First of all, Jesus was crucified around 33 A.D., according to the best guesses of historians. The gospels were written around 70-80 A.D. That's just a few decades down the road- it would be like writing about Truman now. Generally, for the truth to be distorted into a myth, it takes much longer than that- usually several hundred years. The fact that so little time elapsed suggests to me that the Gospels are a historic record, albeit one shrouded in rumor and urban legends (Especially when you take into account flawed translations and the constant retellings of these stories). I'm not saying that Jesus turned water into wine, but I do feel that his teaching and crucifiction were, for the most part, documented with a fair degree of accuracy.

Many naysayers are critical of the time it took to compile the gospels, claiming church conspiracy and fabrication of events.

This link is from a prior post on this very subject.

My second reason may seem a little more far-fetched, as it does even to me, but it's too important to discount. After Jesus's death, something had to have happened. Something big. Afterall, why would Jesus's disciples, all of who were just common shmucks, feel so compelled to return after his supposed resurrection to spread the word of the Gospels? The fact they did so is undeniable- that's how Christianity spread. It must have been something that was powerful to them that compelled them to do it. Is it possible that, just maybe it was a supernatural occurence (i.e. a resurrection) that made them do so?

You bring up a very powerful point.

11 of Jesus apostles died as martyrs on the basis of 2 things: the resurrection of Christ, and their belief in him as the Son of God.

Peter - crucified
Andrew - crucifed
Matthew - sword
James, son of Alphaeus - crucified
Philip - crucified
Simon - crucified
Thaddaeus - arrows
James - stoned
Thomas - spear
Bartholomew - crucified
James son of Zebedee - sword

One can argue that a lot of people die for lies. This is true, but they died thinking it was the truth.

If the resurrection didn't take place (i.e. a lie), the disciples knew it.

Why would the disciples die for a lie, knowing it was a lie?

What I definitely believe, however, is that Jesus was a brilliant moral philosopher, who taught us important lessons

Would a brilliant moral philosopher lie about his own identity? Jesus didn't claim to have the answer, he claimed to BE the answer, saying he is the way, the truth, and the life and the only way to the Father.

Some naysayers argue that Christ never directly claimed to be God. They discredit Jesus's claims to his identity as 'I am', 'Lord of the Sabbath', and 'I and the Father are one' because he didn't use the specific word combination 'I am God.'
 
Last edited:
IAmJacksUserName said:
I'm not saying that Jesus turned water into wine
i'm inclined to think that's simply a metaphor for something else (turning non-believers into believers or whatever).

likewise, perhaps son of god doesn't literally mean he was the son of god. perhaps it's simply a metaphor.

IAmJacksUserName said:
What I definitely believe, however, is that Jesus was a brilliant moral philosopher, who taught us important lessons, that are still important to follow today, on how to treat our fellow human beings.
i agree. the sad part is how many people call themselves christians but whose actions suggest otherwise.

alasdair
 
alasdairm said:
i'm inclined to think that's simply a metaphor for something else (turning non-believers into believers or whatever).

The purpose behind his miracles was to prove he was the Son of God by showing his power over nature (water into wine, calming the tempest, walking on water), his power over the demon world (casting out demons), power over the material realm (feeding of the 5 thousand), power over disease, and power over death (raising the dead). Some of these could be applied metaphorically, but supposedly they happened literally.
 
11 of Jesus apostles died as martyrs on the basis of 2 things: the resurrection of Christ, and their belief in him as the Son of God.

Peter - crucified
Andrew - crucifed
Matthew - sword
James, son of Alphaeus - crucified
Philip - crucified
Simon - crucified
Thaddaeus - arrows
James - stoned
Thomas - spear
Bartholomew - crucified
James son of Zebedee - sword
that's what says the story
but all religions rely on fancy stories and fairy tales

i remember a course of medieval art where the teacher had told us that technically, saint james could not be buried in Santiago de Compostela where his body's supposed to be and attracts pilgrims every year

i also remember another course where we studied old texts and the teacher explained to us that the martyrs whose feats were depicted had simply never existed and were just inventions of the local clergy trying to advertise their parish and give it some cult following

If the resurrection didn't take place (i.e. a lie), the disciples knew it.
they knew what would be written about them in a book after their deaths? er, not really no
how about "they never heard about resurrection and it was only added afterwards to the story so it would sell better"?

many people die for their ideals
if jesus and the disciples existed, and if they died as martyrs, doesn't mean they believed in what was invented afterwards about them

Naysayers argue that Christ never directly claimed to be God. They discredit Jesus's claims to his identity as 'I am', 'Lord of the Sabbath', and 'I and the Father are one' because he didn't use the specific word combination 'I am God.'
[...]

The purpose behind his miracles was to prove he was the Son of God by showing his power over nature [...] but supposedly they happened literally.
maybe you haven't understood yet, but we don't take "it's written in the bible" as a proof of anything
 
<< I definitely believe, however, is that Jesus was a brilliant moral philosopher, who taught us important lessons, that are still important to follow today, on how to treat our fellow human beings. Whether or not there even is a god doesn't change this for me.>>

For me, this is as far as I'm willing to go, as well. However, I simply cannot believe in the other aspects of the Jesus mythology, such as being the Son of God, Him walking on the Sea of Galilee, raising the dead, rising into Heaven, etc.; I see those as mythologized events that became much bigger than they actually were through the process of storytelling through the generations. I acknowledge that there *might* have been events like them that were real, but which were increasingly fictionalized over time.

Why don't I believe? Because, the ancient world is full of strange stories. If you are to believe some ancient Roman historians, a vision of Angels behind Pope Leo I stopped Attila the Hun from pillaging Rome. If you are to believe Gregory of Tours, a man who stole a sheep from the local shrine's flock spontaneously combusted the next day at the church altar. I see all of these as morality tales, rather than depictions of real events.

However, I try not to be overly closed and dogmatic about what I believe in. The world often *is* a strange place, and I can't pretend to know everything about how it works, nor that my way of knowing is somehow superior to others given my limited experience. Maybe Jesus really did do all those miracles, and if so, I can totally understand why so many people died for their belief in Him. But for my part, I just can't do it.
 
vegan: Of course I'm aware that quoting scripture to your like falls on closed hearts and minds. My point is that some people try to use scripture to point out that Christ never said he was God. I went back and edited the last paragraph to read "Some naysayers argue..."

alasdairm said:
supposedly? you don't sound very convinced...

:)

alasdair

Personally, I believe that Jesus performed miracles. I threw supposedly in there given the skeptical nature of the peeps reading.
 
Last edited:
Turbo Monk said:
I'm aware that quoting scripture to your like falls on closed hearts and minds.

So I have a closed heart and mind because I don't blindly belive in some stories written 2000 years ago? get real 8)
 
I think you're missing the point of what he said. He said "I am the son of God". By saying that, he shows that he is aware that he is part of the source. and Then he says "and you're my brothers and sisters".

We're all sons of God. Bible is just one of many stories, of what it's like when a man lives in spirit.
 
IAmJacksUserName said:
First of all, Jesus was crucified around 33 A.D., according to the best guesses of historians. The gospels were written around 70-80 A.D. That's just a few decades down the road- it would be like writing about Truman now.

well, if you were writing about truman now you'd have the benefit of reams of newspapers, books, etc. you would not have had that in 33CE.

to put it into perspective: how many people do you know who will still believe something like 'al gore said he invented the internet', which is a colossally stupid lie? it's hardly been a few years, let alone several hundred.

think about it another way: even with how much longer people tend to live in today's world, how many people are actually speaking about truman from first-hand experience?
 
Turbo Monk said:
Of course I'm aware that quoting scripture to your like falls on closed hearts and minds.
that's incredibly condescending. it's entirely possible to have an open mind and heart and to disbelieve in the christian world view. they're hardly mutually exclusive.

alasdair
 
alasdairm said:
that's incredibly condescending.

condenscending no, accurate yes

when one no longer considers something possible, their heart & mind is closed off to it
 
is your heart and mind closed to anything?

when one no longer considers something possible, their heart & mind is closed off to it
well, he said this:
we don't take "it's written in the bible" as a proof of anything
he didn't say that, if it's written in the bible, he doesnt consider it a possibility

what he said was that if it's written in the bible, while it may be true, it's not proof[i/]
 
michael said:
to put it into perspective: how many people do you know who will still believe something like 'al gore said he invented the internet', which is a colossally stupid lie?

if i understand the way you said that, i really dont know why you lie so much to prove your points. i JUST watchd on VH1 the video clip of gore saying it. 8)
 
alasdairm said:
that's incredibly condescending.

alasdair


i hardly think it was, stop acting like a drama queen all the time dude. what he said was accurate, nothing more, nothing less.
 
This sums up why you cant believe Jesus was just a great moral teacher:


SoHiAllTheTime said:
^ "Even While Jesus was on earth there was much confusion about who He was. Some thought He was a wise man or a great prophet. Others thought He was a madman (same as today). Still others couldn't decide or didn't care (same as today). But Jesus said, "I and the Father are one" (John 10:30). That means He claimed to be nothing less than God in human flesh.
Many people today don't understand that Jesus claimed to be God. They're content to think of Him as little more than a great moral teacher. But even His enemies understood His claims to deity. That's why they tried to stone Him to death (John 5:18; 10:33) and eventually had Him crucified (John 19:7).
C.S. Lewis observed, "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 up with any patronizing nonsense about His being a great human teacher. He has not left that open to us. He did not intend to" (Mere Christianity [Macmillan, 1952], pp. 40-41)."
 
vegan said:
i also remember another course where we studied old texts and the teacher explained to us that the martyrs whose feats were depicted had simply never existed and were just inventions of the local clergy
I would have serious doubts about a teacher who made such a statement.
 
Top