Doug Shaver

Words get their meanings from many sources. Your dogma is one source, but not the only one.

Gamera

Well, I get them from a text, which I admit I valorize. But I think that's what Christianity is, a valorized text, purportedly of transcendent origin. If not that, why be a Christian as opposed to a UFO enthusiast?

So I think we're arguing not sources, but what the source says, and I think there is plenty of plain language in the text.

RGD

Yup. That's it. No entrance fee, no nothin'.

RGD

And much of that plain language is contradicted by the universe itself.

I've always pitied the poor Christians (in that sense): the word of God is so clearly contradicted by the work of God; one revelation contradicted by the other.

The Bible says the universe is 6,000 years old; that there was a great flood; that mankind started from a single mated pair; etc.

The World says it's 13.7 billion years old; no such flood happened; humans evolved; etc.

Must make it hell to be a christian.

Kosh

Just the "historical jesus", not the god version?

Sven

No. This depends on the total number of scholars.

Then you should conceed that your OP was wrong and we can move along. It's that simple. *shrug*

TomboyMom

I nominate Richbee as the champion goalpost mover on these boards. Hail Richbee.

RGD

A difficult question. After all, the historical version didn't claim to be God. His followers claimed he was God - and that's where, I think, the whole thing falls apart.

EthnAlln

I agree. It's interesting to trace this claim in the four Gospels. In Matthew Caiaphas asks Jesus to say if he is the Messiah, and his reply is, "You have said that," then he goes on to talk about the Son of Man ascending and descending into heaven. That's not a claim of divinity. Even if he had said, "Yes, I'm the Messiah," that would not be the same as claiming to be God. The Jews were expecting a human Messiah, not a clone of God. Only in Mark does Jesus, perhaps make the claim to be God. In response to Caiaphas' question, he says "I am (ego eimi)," which could echo God's name as spoken to Moses when the latter asked it. (Most of Jesus' quotations of the Hebrew Scriptures use the language of the Septuagint Greek translation; Hebrew itself was a dead language, used only in ritual, and many Jews of the time couldn't read it. That's why the Septuagint translation was necessary.) But Jesus said "ego eimi" in other situations, as in Matthew 14:27, where he came walking over the water to his disciples; in English Bibles the phrase is translated, "It is I," which is the only thing that makes sense in that context, although of course "ego eimi" means literally "I am." But you can't say literally "It is I" in Greek. That's the only way you can say it.

In Luke's Gospel, Jesus refuses to answer the question, saying that they wouldn't believe him if he said so. And in John's Gospel, the question doesn't even get asked. Jesus simply says that they can ask the people who heard him teach what he was claiming.

So, only one of the four Gospels puts even an ambiguous public statement of the claim to be God into Jesus' mouth. It is true that in private, with his disciples, John has him talking about how he and the Father are One and about "the glory I had with Thee before the world existed." That is certainly a claim to be God. But John's Gospel is very far from historical fact. It is greatly embroidered, with all the incidents and dialogue intended to prove a point. In sum, you are absolutely right that the claim of divinity of Jesus was made after the fact, probably after the synoptic Gospels were written and before the Gospel of John.

Richbee

Yet you have NO historical sources that support your fantasy assertions!?!?!

LOL!