Jesus Christ, what's the real story?

[flowperson]

As an addendum to all of this eloquent discussion regarding the"truth" of Jesus' existence and deeds 2,000 years ago, "truth" and "belief" may be one in the same thing, and then life is easier. But deception and illusion also enable "falsehood" and "belief" to go hand in hand. If I'm not mistaken, that is the crux of the discussion here.

"Belief" should be enough for believers, but there is never enough proof of "truth" for sceptics.

flow....

[RubySera_Martin]

Originally Posted by wil

Sorry Ruby, my faux pas...I've been accused of discrediting the old and new testament by not quite believing the same interpretations as others....

that is what I was refering to...

the discussions here still apply along those lines though....as in this plane we will never have all the answers but we will continue to have great discussion.

Okay, thanks for explaining. I figured it must be something of the sort

[Quahom1]

Originally Posted by inhumility

The truth is that Jesus existed historically (he was not a myth) but he was not God; he never proclaimed as such, there are no direct quotes from him in this regards. God talked with Jesus and revealed His word on him, He chose Jesus as his Messenger/Prophet/Messiah, Jesus was also not a Son of God either, except in metaphoric sense.
Jews of that time did not believe that Jesus was a true Moshiach or Prophet of God and to prove that they tried to kill him by putting him on cross, Jesus went into a swoon due to the injuries inflicted on him. He was delivered from cross alive and placed in a room like tomb where he was treated for the injuries.
This was done secretly lest the Jews again torture him. Afterwards, he went to spread the gospel to the remaining ten tribes of the House of Israel, he died a natural death later at some point in the history.
I am an Ahmadi a faith in Islam. This is all truth and Hazrat Mirza Ghulam Ahmad on words of Revelation from God has substantiated his arguments in this connection from Bible, History, Archaeology and Quran etc.
Thanks

Well written, but historically in-accurate. Jesus claimed much more than simply being "God". He told us all that, He is THE God. He said "I AM who AM". In short, He claimed to be everything. Can't get much more specific than that...

v/r

Q

[cavalier]

The further this thread goes, my feeling is that the relevent question is not, "what is true?" but rather, "what is truth?"

Some philosopher(s) must have asked this question. If any of you have any education in this area, or any thoughts of your own, perhaps you caould add them to the new "what is truth?" thread on the the philosophy board.
Thanks

Ah, just seen there's already a thread started, "What is objective truth?"
I'd best go and look there hadn't I?

[nimesh0775]

Originally Posted by flowperson

As an addendum to all of this eloquent discussion regarding the"truth" of Jesus' existence and deeds 2,000 years ago, "truth" and "belief" may be one in the same thing, and then life is easier. But deception and illusion also enable "falsehood" and "belief" to go hand in hand. If I'm not mistaken, that is the crux of the discussion here.

"Belief" should be enough for believers, but there is never enough proof of "truth" for sceptics.

flow....

I'd replace belief with the specificity of "reasonable faith". This is faith based on knowledge from a reasonable authority. Also, for one who has realised the truth, he can no longer be regarded as a "believer" because he has realised the truth - there is no longer any doubt.

It is clear that all phenomena that we know of or study etc is all based on reasonable faith in some authoritative knowledge and so there is no reason to single out religion as unique in this regard.

[nimesh0775]

Originally Posted by Quahom1

Well written, but historically in-accurate. Jesus claimed much more than simply being "God". He told us all that, He is THE God. He said "I AM who AM". In short, He claimed to be everything. Can't get much more specific than that...

v/r

Q

1. Where does Jesus say "I am THE God"? - he never says that at all - he identifies himself as the Son of God.

2. How did you go from "I am who am" to "I am God" ? This is what I mean - it is not specific, you have made an inference and pretend it to be "Truth". What "I am who am" means is open to interpretation because it is not clear cut what Jesus is saying there - so it would be dangerous to claim Jesus is saying something beyond doubt when there is no evidence for it. There are other more reasonable and direct ways of understanding Jesus' statement "I am who am" - but it depends on whether those who read Jesus' teachings are open to the possibility that Jesus might not after all be God and may be a very dear Son of God, as he CLEARLY SPECIFICALLY says all the time.

[nimesh0775]

Originally Posted by cavalier

The further this thread goes, my feeling is that the relevent question is not, "what is true?" but rather, "what is truth?"

Some philosopher(s) must have asked this question. If any of you have any education in this area, or any thoughts of your own, perhaps you caould add them to the new "what is truth?" thread on the the philosophy board.
Thanks

Ah, just seen there's already a thread started, "What is objective truth?"
I'd best go and look there hadn't I?

Objective truth exists as a theory until it is realised in fact by one who is self-realised. The objectivity of the objective truth is only accessible to he who has practiced the process for realising that truth. Other than that, only God can truly be simultaneously objective and subjective - because He defines objectivity. Simultaneously what He considers to be truth is immediately Truth (e.g. in Bible where God says 'let there be light' and then light comes into existence) - and so is simultaneously subjective and objective - that Absolute nature has no relative concepts for everything on that level is Truth.

[taijasi]

Naturally, Christ taught that we are all Sons of the Most High, He emphasized this throughout His Ministry, and He never asked for our worship. He even clearly distinguishes Himself from the `Father' when He points out that it is not Himself, but the FATHER which is "in Him" which "does these things" (heals the sick, raises the dead, etc.).

And what is the natural consequence of acknowledging this? That we must follow in Christ's own footsteps - and specifically EMULATE HIS ATTITUDES AND ACTIONS ... rather than simply singing His praises. Which is easier? And thus we see which of these has become the heart of an entire religion ... and which is the narrow way about which Christ spoke.

So again, the real story of Jesus of Nazareth is the more difficult to accept, because it IMPELS us to "be all that we CAN be," to borrow from the U.S. Army slogan. Anything else - is really not worthy of our time ... (then again, I suppose it just depends on what we wish to accomplish) ...

taijasi

[wil]

Originally Posted by taijasi

Naturally, Christ taught that we are all Sons of the Most High, He emphasized this throughout His Ministry, and He never asked for our worship. He even clearly distinguishes Himself from the `Father' when He points out that it is not Himself, but the FATHER which is "in Him" which "does these things" (heals the sick, raises the dead, etc.).

And what is the natural consequence of acknowledging this? That we must follow in Christ's own footsteps - and specifically EMULATE HIS ATTITUDES AND ACTIONS ... rather than simply singing His praises. Which is easier? And thus we see which of these has become the heart of an entire religion ... and which is the narrow way about which Christ spoke.

So again, the real story of Jesus of Nazareth is the more difficult to accept, because it IMPELS us to "be all that we CAN be," to borrow from the U.S. Army slogan. Anything else - is really not worthy of our time ... (then again, I suppose it just depends on what we wish to accomplish) ...

taijasi

amen my brother, deciding to follow our elder brother and wayshower is not an easy task....learning that saving yourself has a lot to do with yourself. That old personal responsiblity thing....and you know what I miss most is blame...sure was nice when we used to blame G-d for this or that, or blame others...of all the things I miss on this path...I miss blame the most.

[Dondi]

Originally Posted by taijasi

Naturally, Christ taught that we are all Sons of the Most High, He emphasized this throughout His Ministry, and He never asked for our worship. He even clearly distinguishes Himself from the `Father' when He points out that it is not Himself, but the FATHER which is "in Him" which "does these things" (heals the sick, raises the dead, etc.).

And what is the natural consequence of acknowledging this? That we must follow in Christ's own footsteps - and specifically EMULATE HIS ATTITUDES AND ACTIONS ... rather than simply singing His praises. Which is easier? And thus we see which of these has become the heart of an entire religion ... and which is the narrow way about which Christ spoke.

So again, the real story of Jesus of Nazareth is the more difficult to accept, because it IMPELS us to "be all that we CAN be," to borrow from the U.S. Army slogan. Anything else - is really not worthy of our time ... (then again, I suppose it just depends on what we wish to accomplish) ...

taijasi

I am in agreement with you on the above highlighted statement, taij, although I'm having a little bit of difficulty with that "raising the dead" thing. Can't seem to get the hang of it.

We Christians can seem so occupied with getting folks saved, ala "sinners prayer" or what have you, that we neglect what we are being saved from, namely ourselves and oursinful tendencies. Salvation goes so much further than having one's sins forgiven and having a happy place in heaven. Why did God save us? So that we can be like Christ. The process is eternal starting with this earthly life. We must strive for that end, that ideal that Christ set the bar seeminly too high to reach, yet that is God's plan. Nor can we do it ourselves, the Spirit of God is within us to bring us to that ideal. Think of it like a father helping his toddler to walk. He needs to hold the little hands steady until the tot can stumble and stagger along on his own.

[nimesh0775]

Originally Posted by taijasi

So again, the real story of Jesus of Nazareth is the more difficult to accept, because it IMPELS us to "be all that we CAN be," to borrow from the U.S. Army slogan. Anything else - is really not worthy of our time ... (then again, I suppose it just depends on what we wish to accomplish) ...

taijasi

Yes, i agree mostly, in the sense that Jesus wanted us to love God the way he did.

But, we should do so in a humble state of mind. We should never think ourselves so great that we can be on the same level of Jesus' devotion, but to always stay a servant of the servant of God.

What is most pleasing to Jesus is when we sincerely try and practically apply the principles he enunciates in our personal lives - i.e. serve other devotees of God, just as a family is supposed to co-operate to serve the father.

[nimesh0775]

Originally Posted by wil

amen my brother, deciding to follow our elder brother and wayshower is not an easy task....learning that saving yourself has a lot to do with yourself. That old personal responsiblity thing....and you know what I miss most is blame...sure was nice when we used to blame G-d for this or that, or blame others...of all the things I miss on this path...I miss blame the most.

Yeah, people think practicing spirituality is a cop-out, but it's the bravest thing to do. To accept that every piece of suffering i am going through is a result of my own free will and choice - most of us can't believe we would be that stupid to pick this material body full of disease, death etc. It is personal responsibility and empowerment.

[nimesh0775]

Originally Posted by Dondi

I am in agreement with you on the above highlighted statement, taij, although I'm having a little bit of difficulty with that "raising the dead" thing. Can't seem to get the hang of it.

We Christians can seem so occupied with getting folks saved, ala "sinners prayer" or what have you, that we neglect what we are being saved from, namely ourselves and oursinful tendencies. Salvation goes so much further than having one's sins forgiven and having a happy place in heaven. Why did God save us? So that we can be like Christ. The process is eternal starting with this earthly life. We must strive for that end, that ideal that Christ set the bar seeminly too high to reach, yet that is God's plan. Nor can we do it ourselves, the Spirit of God is within us to bring us to that ideal. Think of it like a father helping his toddler to walk. He needs to hold the little hands steady until the tot can stumble and stagger along on his own.

Like Jesus, but we will never be able to emulate him. He is unique dear servant of God, and we should be happy to try and follow his instructions sincerely. That doesn't mean we will be able to heal the sick etc, but we will be able to bring people love for God - but not just by our effort (although effort is necessary it is insufficient) - but also by mercy of God and Jesus, by God and Jesus empowering us we can truly do the highest welfare by giving people love of God and reviving their eternal spiritual nature.

[taijasi]

Originally Posted by nimesh0775

Yes, i agree mostly, in the sense that Jesus wanted us to love God the way he did.

But, we should do so in a humble state of mind. We should never think ourselves so great that we can be on the same level of Jesus' devotion, but to always stay a servant of the servant of God.

What is most pleasing to Jesus is when we sincerely try and practically apply the principles he enunciates in our personal lives - i.e. serve other devotees of God, just as a family is supposed to co-operate to serve the father.

Agreed, up until the point where you say that we cannot be on the same level of Jesus' devotion. Nor is the emphasis on serving a servant necessary. The result is unneeded separation from our Heavenly Father. Christ did not preach this.

Consider, nimesh, that humily is not the same as servility. To confuse these two, is to be in error. As I say, I agree with what you started out to say - but not with where you end up. Christ gives us the insight we need in saying, "The Son of Man comes not to be served, by to serve." Further, I think that what is actually most pleasing to Jesus, is not quite what you suggest ... although this type of cooperation is an absolute prerequisite for what I'm about to say: Not simply that fellow devotees might serve one another, but that all of God's children might be ministered to - THIS is most pleasing to Christ. For remember:

"I say unto you which hear, Love your enemies, do good to them which hate you, Bless them that curse you, and pray for them which despitefully use you. Give to every man that asketh of thee; and of him that taketh away thy goods ask them not again. And as ye would that men should do to you, do ye also to them likewise. For if ye love them which love you, what thank have ye? for sinners also love those that love them. And if ye do good to them which do good to you, what thank have ye? for sinners also do even the same. And if ye lend to them of whom ye hope to receive, what thank have ye? for sinners also lend to sinners, to receive as much again. But love ye your enemies, and do good, and lend, hoping for nothing again; and your reward shall be great, and ye shall be the children of the Highest: for he is kind unto the unthankful and to the evil. " (Luke 6:28-32)

I would humbly refer any Christian, or Biblical scholar, who has overlooked this last passage, emphasized in BLUE, to consider or reconsider - that the Lord our God is a LOVING God. Christ has asked us here to do something very difficult, yes, but not impossible. Otherwise, he would not have asked it. I would also refer anyone with Buddhist connections to enquire about, or revisit, the Perfection of the Paramitas. For this is precisely what is being asked of us. And again, it is not easy.

But to say, "we cannot do these perfect things as did Christ Jesus" is to miss the point entirely. Yes, we CAN do them. Christians may approach this from a different angle as Buddhists, or with a different set of assumptions as Hindus, but the reality is the same. Jesus taught his disciples how to cast out spirits (`elementals' in the most oft-cited Biblical passage), and how to heal the sick (where physical infirmity is rarely the actual source of ill, thus he taught them of the CAUSE of illness, and the much more challenging task of treating this cause, and not just the symptoms).

He taught them not simply how to repeat blindly and mechanistically something chanted, or words uttered - he taught them science!!! What he taught them is a Sacred Science, so termed because it ALWAYS dealt with underlying causes, and not with surface appearances. And yes, having FAITH that the Sacred Science will "work" is indeed important. It is important in the same way that having FAITH in gravity is important if you see a large rock falling out of the sky - headed swiftly for your head! Let me ask you - are you going to fall to your knees and pray god that you are "delivered?" Or are you going to MOVE???

Sacred Science (call it by any name you will) is not different than physics in that it has to do with Cause and Effect. Jesus did not simply teach his disciples TO pray, he taught them how, and he taught them WHY it is effective. He explained things to them. And yes, sometimes their questioning must have driven him nuts! So he did not always answer them in quite they way they might have wished. Sometimes, he answered their question with another question, or gave them a koan - and always the end result was that they learned much, much more that way than if he had simply given a snappy comeback.

Originally Posted by nimesh0775

Like Jesus, but we will never be able to emulate him.

Again, I think this goes against everything that Christ Himself taught. Of course we will be able to emulate him. Just remember to forgive yourself when, even after a lifetime, you are still - not yet perfect. He didn't say it was always easy.

Originally Posted by nimesh0775

He is unique dear servant of God,

Careful how high we build this pedestal. Jesus asked neither for worship, nor for vain and idle flatteries. He DID ask, however, that we emulate Him.

Originally Posted by nimesh0775

That doesn't mean we will be able to heal the sick etc, but we will be able to bring people love for God - but not just by our effort (although effort is necessary it is insufficient) - but also by mercy of God and Jesus, by God and Jesus empowering us we can truly do the highest welfare by giving people love of God and reviving their eternal spiritual nature.

There are any number of fellow Masters of the Wisdom (or Lords of Compassion, as was Master Jesus), in addition to their trained Disciples (many of them High Initiates) who can and do, heal as did Christ Jesus, every single day. To witness this directly should be evidence enough ... though certainly, not for one who really doesn't want to believe, for to such a person, not Christ Himself could convince him otherwise (as has already been pointed out).

Namaskar,

taijasi

[flowperson]

Originally Posted by nimesh0775

I'd replace belief with the specificity of "reasonable faith". This is faith based on knowledge from a reasonable authority. Also, for one who has realised the truth, he can no longer be regarded as a "believer" because he has realised the truth - there is no longer any doubt.

It is clear that all phenomena that we know of or study etc is all based on reasonable faith in some authoritative knowledge and so there is no reason to single out religion as unique in this regard.

Welcome nimesh !!!

"Reasonable faith" sounds too much like a term in some sort of contract for me. I'm more comfortable with "belief".

I believe, though, that we should examine the phenomenon of Jesus also from the aspect of time frames, since we do live in a relativistic universe.

If we accept the fact that Jesus was on earth for a fixed period of time, as the myths related in the synoptic gospels demonstrate to us, and if we believe that Jesus' words and deeds were so meaningful that we're still discussing them actively on the internet, a medium of communication which transcends time and space 2,000 years or so later, then I have "belief" that Jesus' presence and spirit is able to transcend a boundary that none of us are able to personally, time itself.

These days our images can do this, and our voices also, even we can do it for short time periods in airplanes and autos, but these have nothing to do with spirit. They are only the thinnest veneer of who and what we really are.

This is not because a certain "authoritative knowledge" made a "reasonable faith" possible over this period of time. As we all know knowledge formation and transmission is a dynamic thing, and is changing faster and more significantly with each day that passes. But it is because a series of stories, from several knowledgeable authors who existed 1,900 to 1,700 years ago coincided in their visions of what this man said and did several dozens and even hundreds of years before they existed, that Jesus' spirit has been able to defeat the boundaries of time and space and inform us of His visions of eternity. The stories effectively engage our emotions AND our intellects. That is what effective mythology does for civilizations in forming core belief systems.

Long statement short, "reasonable faith" that comes from "authoritative knowledge" is by its nature fixed in time, bound to be undermined, and certain to become more and more meaningless over the relentless forward flow of time and events.

The "truth" of what Jesus was as a man is lost to us forever, except for what we choose to believe of the stories written about His life and death. But his spirit is always available to us through prayer, meditations, word offerings, thoughts that we sacrifice to the timeless "way", which all have the capability to unite us with His meaning from time to time if we are truly fortunate.

flow....