- This topic has 672 replies, 27 voices, and was last updated 14 years, 3 months ago by
.
- Posts
Back to subject, many of Jesus' early followers (pre Constantine), especially the non-gentile ones viewed Jesus differently as described by the historian Gibbon, “… In their eyes, Jesus of Nazareth was a mere mortal, the legitimate son of Joseph and Mary: but he was the best and wisest of the human race, selected as the worthy instrument to restore upon earth the worship of the true and supreme Deity. When he was baptized in the Jordan, the Christ, the first of the aeons, the Son of God himself, descended on Jesus in the form of a dove, to inhabit his mind, and direct his actions during the allotted period of his ministry” (Gibbon; The Decline & Fall of the Roman Empire, V.4, P.366).
Hi cato,
Do you mean Jesus is the literal son of Joseph and Mary?
Don't you believe in virgin birth of Jesus as recorded in Matthew 1?No not particularly, I think it was an embellishment to the truth designed to impress the Romans who were often told such tales. Now that being said it in no way detracts from Jesus or his message. I like the previously expressed view of Jesus as human, but the best and the wisest of us, the most spritually advanced choosen and guided by God for a special mission. He doesn't need virgin birth or divine genetic inheritance for this. A son of God in spirit I can buy, a son of God in flesh I don't. Likewise I think Jesus' mission was one of teacher to show us the way to salvation not to buy it for us. As I have said in a previous thread in the general questions section the whole concept of salvation based on belief of Jesus' sacrifice is illogical and full of inequities. Jesus came to show us the way we need to travel ourselves not take the journey for us.
Quote (gollamudi @ June 19 2008,14:26) Quote (Not3in1 @ June 19 2008,06:56) Quote (Nick Hassan @ June 18 2008,06:22) If someone posts on a subject and unwittingly inserts falsehoods unrelated directly to the subject matter then a quick reminder often sets things straight. However it also sometimes causes folk to take offence as well and so we wander off the subject.
Gene has a point that though you are a Moderator your theology is not above other's here. We are all challenged to find the “falsehoods” in one another's teachings and sharing.Who is qualified to remind anyone that they are perhaps diverting into falsehoods? Everyone has such different theology here that EVERYONE could be reminding EVERYONE that they are believing a falsehood. It's somewhat comical if you think about it.
I guess we should just encourage one another to seek God and search his word out. Give our opinions but then leave it at that and not have any determinations on who is wrong and who is right. Anyway, just my worthless 2 cents on the subject.
Hi Sis,
That's wonderful post, I believe God has chosen you to be the right moderator in this forum. Do continue my sister to encourage and correct many and to lead into the Truth of God.
Love to you
Adam
Adam,Thank you for the kind words, but I am not moderator material. I think everyone has certain gifts and personality traits that help make the group jive. We all contribute what we can. Sometimes I wish I had a better handle on scripture and Greek, but I don't yet. I'm still learning. I debate what I think I know. Mostly, I read back posts and try to encourage. But I get caught-up in the caos too, that is why folks like Nick are needed. He tends to not take things personally and is able to get things back on track. We should appreciate him more. It's a thankless job.
Take care Adam,
MandyQuote (Cato @ June 24 2008,06:04) Jesus came to show us the way we need to travel ourselves not take the journey for us.
Cato,
Something to consider if you take the bible at it's word or as a useful inspired offering:Hebrews 2:10, 11
In bringing many sons to glory, it was fitting that God, for whom and through whom everything exists, should make the author of their salvation perfect through suffering.
Both the one who makes men holy and those who are made holy are of the same family.
So Jesus is not ashamed to call them brothers.
*It was necessary for him to take the journey for us*
MandyQuote (Cato @ June 24 2008,06:04) No not particularly, I think it was an embellishment to the truth designed to impress the Romans who were often told such tales. Now that being said it in no way detracts from Jesus or his message. I like the previously expressed view of Jesus as human, but the best and the wisest of us, the most spritually advanced choosen and guided by God for a special mission. He doesn't need virgin birth or divine genetic inheritance for this. A son of God in spirit I can buy, a son of God in flesh I don't. Likewise I think Jesus' mission was one of teacher to show us the way to salvation not to buy it for us. As I have said in a previous thread in the general questions section the whole concept of salvation based on belief of Jesus' sacrifice is illogical and full of inequities. Jesus came to show us the way we need to travel ourselves not take the journey for us.
Greetings Cato….I must say you present a logical and compelling argument as always….The purpose of a messiah was directed at the Jews,so as to deal with their reinventing of the law and the placent of alot of nonsensical rituals in the way to God and the worship thereof….We cannot ignore the scene at the baptism of Jesus where several witnesses attested to the hearing of the Father saying..( “This is my son in whom I am well pleased”)…And it is very true that the virgin birth is an extrordinary tale….After all God is an extrodinary God….Quote (Not3in1 @ June 24 2008,06:47) Quote (Cato @ June 24 2008,06:04) Jesus came to show us the way we need to travel ourselves not take the journey for us.
Cato,
Something to consider if you take the bible at it's word or as a useful inspired offering:Hebrews 2:10, 11
In bringing many sons to glory, it was fitting that God, for whom and through whom everything exists, should make the author of their salvation perfect through suffering.
Both the one who makes men holy and those who are made holy are of the same family.
So Jesus is not ashamed to call them brothers.
*It was necessary for him to take the journey for us*
Mandy
Nice post Mandy,
I agree with you that God has chosen a person like you and me through whom God can show His love and mercy towards these weak vessels. By glorifying this Jesus God has given us the hope of glorious future in him.
Love to you
AdamQuote (theodorej @ June 24 2008,07:20) Quote (Cato @ June 24 2008,06:04) No not particularly, I think it was an embellishment to the truth designed to impress the Romans who were often told such tales. Now that being said it in no way detracts from Jesus or his message. I like the previously expressed view of Jesus as human, but the best and the wisest of us, the most spritually advanced choosen and guided by God for a special mission. He doesn't need virgin birth or divine genetic inheritance for this. A son of God in spirit I can buy, a son of God in flesh I don't. Likewise I think Jesus' mission was one of teacher to show us the way to salvation not to buy it for us. As I have said in a previous thread in the general questions section the whole concept of salvation based on belief of Jesus' sacrifice is illogical and full of inequities. Jesus came to show us the way we need to travel ourselves not take the journey for us.
Greetings Cato….I must say you present a logical and compelling argument as always….The purpose of a messiah was directed at the Jews,so as to deal with their reinventing of the law and the placent of alot of nonsensical rituals in the way to God and the worship thereof….We cannot ignore the scene at the baptism of Jesus where several witnesses attested to the hearing of the Father saying..( “This is my son in whom I am well pleased”)…And it is very true that the virgin birth is an extrordinary tale….After all God is an extrodinary God….
Perhaps it was at his baptism when the divine spirit entered him that he became the Son, not when he was born. A human with the spirit of God directing and advising could easily be considered God's son. Man with God inside not a demigod hybrid, a fully human man but one with direct contact with the divine.Hi Cato,
What about these verses ?
1. Matt 1:20-2520 But while he thought on these things, behold, the angel of the Lord appeared unto him in a dream, saying, Joseph, thou son of David, fear not to take unto thee Mary thy wife: for that which is conceived in her is of the Holy Ghost.
21 And she shall bring forth a son, and thou shalt call his name JESUS: for he shall save his people from their sins.
22 Now all this was done, that it might be fulfilled which was spoken of the Lord by the prophet, saying,
23 Behold, a virgin shall be with child, and shall bring forth a son, and they shall call his name Emmanuel, which being interpreted is, God with us.
24 Then Joseph being raised from sleep did as the angel of the Lord had bidden him, and took unto him his wife:
25 And knew her not till she had brought forth her firstborn son: and he called his name JESUS
2. Lk 1:30-38
30 Then the angel said to her, “Do not be afraid, Mary, for you have found favor with God.
31 Behold, you will conceive in your womb and bear a son, and you shall name him Jesus.
32 He will be great and will be called Son of the Most High, 11 and the Lord God will give him the throne of David his father,
33 and he will rule over the house of Jacob forever, and of his kingdom there will be no end.”
34 But Mary said to the angel, “How can this be, since I have no relations with a man?” 12
35 And the angel said to her in reply, “The holy Spirit will come upon you, and the power of the Most High will overshadow you. Therefore the child to be born will be called holy, the Son of God.
36 And behold, Elizabeth, your relative, has also conceived 13 a son in her old age, and this is the sixth month for her who was called barren;
37 for nothing will be impossible for God.”
38 Mary said, “Behold, I am the handmaid of the Lord. May it be done to me according to your word.” Then the angel departed from her”Cato……….I agree with you that Jesus was a Man a second Adam who God was with from berth, and was not a preexisting hybrid of any kind. A man just like us and with no other advantage except that God was with him and perfected him, which shows us what God can do in all of us, He is the perfected example of man, the first to truley image the Father, His life was to demenstrate how all man kind must be saved and it the same way he was. That why the words he spoke are so vital to us, we need to take everything he said and apply it to ourselves, He is the perfect example of what we all will become with the help of God the Father and with God's help we can all come to the (FULL) measure of Christ.
Hi brother,
But Cato believes that Jesus was the literal child of Joseph and Mary. Can we accept this?Gollamudi…..I didn't know Cato believed Joseph was Jesus' real Father.
But some of His posts do make sense though.
Peace brother ……………gene
To be honest I don't know who Jesus' biological father was, in all probability it was Joseph. I don't need a virgin birth story to believe that the spirit of God dwelled within him. If I had God's spirit in direct contact with me I might view this as more important then my biological father. If Jesus was anything else then fully human like the rest of us he could not have served as well as the teacher and example he was to humanity. Yes I will admit that I am a heretic in that I believe the Bible while inspired is not the direct unaltered word of God. I think some of the stories are wrong and other pure allegory. The written word is always subject to manipulation interpretation, and translation, just look at all the versions of the Bible. As for the Bible itself it is a collection not a unified work; who decided what works would be included and declared holy? Men appointed by a Roman emperor who I am sure had temporal and not just spiritual motivations for the product and results. The whole virgin birth idea seems spiritually unnecessary, and considering the times and Roman inclinations to make various individual have divine lineage suspect.
Hi Cato,
These are valid points on your side. But I want to provoke your thinking on certain issues;
Had Adam and Eve the first couple have biological parents? Jesus is called as second Adam in N.T, what is that means he has got direct link(connection) with first Adam who also came into existence in a different way. Why not we believe in Jesus' virgin birth, is it so difficult for God the creator to give birth to His beloved son to be of different birth? How can Jesus be true sacrificial Lamb for the remission of sins if he is also of the same sinful origin like us? I know you may say that he committed no sin and was holy without a spot. “If by one man sin entered this world by another man Jesus righteousness imparted to men who believe in his name”. Jesus claimed himself that his origins are from God in heaven. John says the “word” became flesh. Hebrew's writer says “He is the radiance of glory of God and exact representation of His(God's) person”. What does this mean? Is he not unique in these aspects?
Please think over on these lines, I know you studied religion more than any body in this forum.
Peace to you
AdamVirgin birth possible? Of course, yet it seems unlikely and not needed for any purpose he lived for, also considering the Roman proclivity of declaring various notables of coming from Zeus or Apollo or whomever it seems a little too convienent. As far as Adam I view the whole Adam and Eve story as allegorical; I don't think Adam is the beginning of sin for his individual actions. Adam I think is allegory for humanity in general. The fall IMO is the result of spirits decending into matter and adapting to same. I believe it was devolution into the material and now we are evolving back to the spirit side of our natures. Likewise I view the parable of the prodigal son is not a moral lesson but the story of mankind, whereby humanity leaves the upper realms of spirit and later returns a wiser being for his struggles. Jesus I feel was a soul who probably evolved to the point of no longer having the need to be flesh yet came back to be born not for his own evolution but to help the rest of us with ours.
Adam was the first man.
Adam is the word for man.
God made adam, male and female.
Adam is his name and adam is his nature.
We are all adam because we inherit adam nature, but there was one Adam in identity and position. But because he failed all men, Christ became the second Adam and fulfilled that which the first failed to do.
So just as Jesus is a real person and the second Adam, so was the first adam a real person who was called Adam.
T8…..i disagree with your assessment that Adam failed all man kind. Adam could not have done anything else but what he did, Given the nature in Him. and all the rest fail by that same nature which was given by God Himself. It was God intention for man to fall, and experience good and evil, all a long. He could have prevented it easily if He wanted to.But men deceive themselves by this idea of a “FREE WILL” , so they don't see it was all planned and foreknown before it ever happened.
IMO……..gene
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
