NOGO

I am not sure which debate you are referring to.

Some claim that Jesus said that he was God.
Evangelion says that this is not correct but I presume that he believes that Jesus is some kind of heavenly being but not Yahweh. He argued that the lack of stones meant that the people who listened to Jesus did not understand him to say that he was God. Well the verse which I quoted clearly says the opposite. People listening to Jesus did understand that he claimed to be God.

My point of view is different.
I am saying that in GJohn Jesus has a dual personality.
There is Jesus the man and there is the "Word" of God who is in him. Jesus is possessed by the Word of God. Sometime Jesus speaks and sometimes the Godly entity within him speaks, thus the confusion. There are plenty of examples all over the gospel of John that supports this point of view. I have given an example in this thread but if you want more I will oblige.

Does this clarify the situation?

Kosh

Of course, all of this is only important if you assume that Jesus actually said what is reported in the Gospels, which itself is highly suspect.

If Jesus claimed to be God, and people understood it that way, then you would have expected them to stone him. The fact that they did not stone him, leads me to the conclusion that in reality, he did not make that claim. It was later attributed to him only when the Gospel(s) was written.

Rational BAC

I think Nogo has a valid point.

I would think an entity that was half God/half man could have a dual personality. Be speaking as a human at times, and at other times be a channel for the word of God. It does explain some of the scriptural inconsistencies.

Nothing unchristian about the whole concept that I can see. (Of course I am a very easy going, non-literal Christian who can tolerate many different viewpoints)
--------------------------------------------------------------------

PS--------I do think you all (atheists) should cut Magus some slack. You are acting like a bunch of tight-assed fundamentalists on this one.------as supposed free-thinkers I would think you would know better than that.------And would appreciate a Jew with an open mind and with a good case interpreting 1st century Christianity.

I agree perfectly with Magus that he is a 1st century Jew. Just like Jesus. Just like his apostles. Just like all the early 1st century Jews who believed Jesus was the Messiah. Golly, (excuse my French) what is the problem here?

The only ones on this forum who disagree with Magus' position on this are atheists for Gawd's sake.

Soul Invictus

I think Magus55 does catch an extra bit ridicule during dialogue however I think he/she would gain a few "cool" points if he/she didn't abandon threads with a rebut when there's a legitimate critique being posed, and you can't say he/she doesn't do it. I don't mind conversing with Magus55 and I would be hard pressed to hear him/her say that I've berated him/her in any way. I will concur with the other members here that he/she acts a bit of the troll role to abandon a thread when stumped. Making a convincing argument in any discussion is important, however personally I've found it futile dealing with Magus55 due to experiencing nonresponsiveness on several occasions myself, as well as observing it from when he/she posts with other members....and there's no reason for that. Concede, and move on. So on that note, he/she may subject him/herself to a bit or derision due to the manner with which he/she chooses to conduct dialogue via these forums....so I think that it would follow that his/her reputation would become a bit marred.

As far as the Jew issue is concerned, I'm not as knowledgable so feel free to correct me on my statements. There's been the proponents that Jews are an ethnicity (which I disagree with) and people who wish to follow a Jewish culture, not limited to practicing Judaism. I haven't followed the whole "Jews for Jesus" crusade because to my knowledge it sounded contradictory. This could be a learning point - however I feel that's been beaten in the ground too. Is Magus55 saying he/she is a person who practices Jewish cultures except for adhering to their religion, Judaism? How material is the religion to the issue of being a Jew (outside of dietary practices, etc?

Soul Invictus

Yes. Thank you

NOGO

Your logic is faulty here.
The fact that they did not stone him, leads me to the conclusion that in reality, he did not make that claim.

This simply does not follow.
You assume that they had the absolute power to stone him and he had no choice but to be stoned. Perhaps they tried and failed and he ran away.

The claim of being God is all over GJohn. For example the Godly entity within Jesus says that if you accept him as saviour and accept his teachings (the Word within you) He will resurrect you at the end of times. So this entity attributes to itself divine powers.

Also my comment was in response to Evangelion's comment. Evangelion believes that Jesus actually said everything that is written in GJohn. In light of this context then the presence of stones meant that Jesus' audience believed that Jesus claimed to be God. That is what Evangelion was trying to refute. He claimed that since there was no stones in the story then Jesus never claimed to be God.

But all this is beside the point.
You will notice that I always add "in GJohn" or something like "according to GJohn". The Jesus of GJohn is very different than that of other books of the NT.

My claim is that in GJohn Jesus is a man inhabited by the Godly entiry which John calls the "Word" of God.

Of course, all of this is only important if you assume that Jesus actually said what is reported in the Gospels, which itself is highly suspect.

This goes without saying. I am not discussing history. I am discussing the Gospel of John. In my opinion The Jesus of GJohn never existed. But again ... I was debating Christians!