jump to last post 1-4 of 4 discussions (33 posts)

Jesus Christ: Madman or Something Worse?

  1. profile image0
    Greatest I amposted 4 years ago

    Jesus Christ: Madman or Something Worse?

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j4QXOgVf … r_embedded

    Was Jesus a man or a God?

    Was his policies moral or not?

    Regards
    DL

    1. Ceegen profile image84
      Ceegenposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      Jesus is God in the flesh, the same "I AM" of the older-part of the Testament.

      Everything Jesus did, He did to declare that He was God. Jesus is the only flesh-and-blood biblical figure who allowed people to worship Him. He forgave sins, a thing that only God can do according to scripture, and the Pharisees knew this. They understood what He was saying, and sought to kill Him for it. That is why the reason for Jesus' death is blasphemy according to the Sanhedrin court.

      His laws are righteous and just, so much so, that even He submitted Himself to be judged in the flesh. Lived a sinless life according to the Law that He wrote, and died a sinless man. With that sinless death, the burden of the law is lifted.

      Stay Free (Part 18 - The Rise of the Pharisees)
      http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5IvSpKBqc6o
      12m 59s

      That video pretty much sums up how I view this subject, in part. I will watch your video and respond in a few.

      1. profile image0
        Emile Rposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        Nice video. Although I'm not sure there is evidence that Jesus was proclaiming himself to be God, the video was sad since it is obvious to the casual observer that the religious today mirror the thoughts and behavior patterns of the pharisees and they are so oblivious to the fact. I guess such behavior is the natural byproduct of religion.

        1. profile image0
          Greatest I amposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          I agree. Even the ancients had doubts about Jesus' divinity. He was not made part of the trinity till 300 years after his death and even then, it had to be forced through by Constantine who did it so that he could usurp Jesus' position as man/God later.

          P. S. I don't know if we can know what the thoughts and behavior patterns of the Pharisees were in any exact way.

          Regards
          DL

          1. Ceegen profile image84
            Ceegenposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            The "trinity" is Catholic doctrine. No surprise this doctrine pops up around that time period.

            I would say I'm more of a Messianic Jew than a Christian, honestly. All the early "church fathers" that Catholicism claims, were nearly all Jews.

            1. profile image0
              Greatest I amposted 4 years ago in reply to this

              I have forgotten if your sect accepted or rejected Jesus.
              Care to refresh my memory.

              Also, you conclude from that clip thata Jesus' sayings etc. were good. That would include his forgiving sin, right?
              I am actually more of the Jewish school that says that I am to forgive sins against me and thus earn the benefits of forgiving. I see Jesus as taking my good feelings and moral training and leaving me with nothing if he forgives in my stead. It is the one hurt who should forgive. Not a God who cannot be. It is victims that need closure. Not God.

              Do you agree?

              If not, why not?

              Regards
              DL

              Regards
              DL

              1. Ceegen profile image84
                Ceegenposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                I have forgotten if your sect accepted or rejected Jesus.
                Care to refresh my memory.


                Accepted 100%. Jesus is God in the flesh; the "Son" of God. Ie, He was begotten of God, and when you are begotten of something, you are literally a part of that something. Jesus is a "part of" God, like an aspect of God.

                The relationship between Jesus and God, is kind of like the whole idea behind the movie "Avatar". Kind of...

                Also, you conclude from that clip thata Jesus' sayings etc. were good. That would include his forgiving sin, right?

                Right.

                I am actually more of the Jewish school that says that I am to forgive sins against me and thus earn the benefits of forgiving. I see Jesus as taking my good feelings and moral training and leaving me with nothing if he forgives in my stead. It is the one hurt who should forgive. Not a God who cannot be. It is victims that need closure. Not God.

                Do you agree?


                Yes and no.

                If not, why not?

                It is selfish to think that we should be the ones to forgive or condemn others for actions against us or others, when we ourselves are guilty of sins.

                If you condemn someone, you are literally taking the matter into your own hands, and are therefore responsible for anything that happens to that person. But if you forgive someone of their evil against you, then they are no longer your problem, and you leave it entirely up to God to decide the situation.

                If you accept Jesus as your personal savior, judgment will "Passover" you in your forgiveness of others, by allowing God to take care of the situation for you. Only God knows the "hearts and minds" of people, and this is why He is righteous enough to judge us. He knows what our intent is.

                This concept is illustrated in the parable of the wicked servant, Matthew chapter 18, verses 23 to 35. You sow wickedness, you reap wickedness.

                There are sins of the flesh, and sins of the spirit. Sins of the flesh include sins against your own body, against other people and the like, and is a manifestation of the sins of the spirit. The sins of the spirit is your intent that is related to the manifestation of your physical, tangible sin. Parallel to each other.

                1. profile image0
                  Greatest I amposted 4 years ago in reply to this

                  You are concerned with the guilty getting too much forgiveness.
                  How strange.

                  We are done though. You are not interested in the morality of things and I am.

                  Regards
                  DL

        2. Ceegen profile image84
          Ceegenposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          No, the video is not intended to show Jesus as God.

          It is intended that, under the pretext that Jesus is God, that Jesus was trying to set the record straight Himself. Oddly enough, He was killed by the same people who claimed to have been following His commandments. It just goes to show, that we collectively misunderstand what God was saying about all these laws, as evident in the example that Jesus set while dwelling in the flesh.

      2. profile image0
        Greatest I amposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        Ceegen

        Jesus was a Jew. In their tradition which he followed, Jews could forgive each other. That is what the scapegoating was all about.

        Are you able to forgive sin?
        I am and have.

        If you cannot then you do not pick up your cross and follow Jesus the way he urges you to do in scriptures.

        As to Jesus being God, please get scripture and verse where God admits that he can die.

        Regards
        DL

    2. Ceegen profile image84
      Ceegenposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      Watched the video.

      If you believe everything in that video, then there is nothing I could say that would sway you from your position. No evidence or personal testimony would be good enough. I mean, what do you want me to say to that video? It's the complete opposite to what I believe.

      I would say that the narrator is taking things way out of context, but I know that isn't true, he's just got his mind set that Jesus isn't God. There is nothing paranormal, nothing spiritual in the "humanist" eyes, because they see with only their eyes. I can't make anyone "see" the spiritual aspect of the bible, if they refuse there is anything that is spiritual at all.

      But I will say this about the whole "your friend has cancer, do you tell him" question of the video: The bible clearly states that lying is a sin, so lying to your friend about having cancer is still a bad thing from the biblical perspective. At least those two things agree. I don't know why that segment was in there, as if lying is ordained by the bible which is clearly false.

      1. profile image0
        Greatest I amposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        Is lying ordained if God does it. Scriptures show he did. Give your yes or no on this and if need be I will get you the quote. I need to know your position on the question regardless. Let me broaden it as well. Is God moral if he breaks his own commandments?

        Your "I would say that the narrator is taking things way out of context, but I know that isn't true,", is quite confusing.

        Are you saying he is out of context or not with this strange sentence?

        "then there is nothing I could say that would sway you from your position."

        These are moral questions. Are you saying that you cannot come up with a defence of what Jesus said?

        Are Jesus' saying moral or not?
        Try his divorce law. I think it anti-love. Do you agree or not?
        Show your position in term of the morality of that law.

        Regards
        DL

        1. Ceegen profile image84
          Ceegenposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          Is lying ordained if God does it. Scriptures show he did. Give your yes or no on this and if need be I will get you the quote. I need to know your position on the question regardless. Let me broaden it as well. Is God moral if he breaks his own commandments?

          "Strong delusion, so that they would believe a lie." It isn't that God is lying, but allows them to see whatever they want so they can believe their own lie. It's part of free will. Although I have no way of proving it, since I am not a biblical scholar, I am sure that some a lot of what we think as evil being attributed to God is actually a misunderstood idiom.

          Even in the English language, we have idioms that other people in a distant time might see as contrary to what we today mean it to be. An example of this would be "That house is a money pit." To us, we know that means the house is just bleeding money from our pockets. In a thousand years, it could mean that the house is worth more than what it is listed as; ie, the pit is full of money. It's like the glass being half-full or half-empty. It depends what frame of reference we're using.

          Or even, "Have your cake, and eat it too."

          Your "I would say that the narrator is taking things way out of context, but I know that isn't true,", is quite confusing.

          Are you saying he is out of context or not with this strange sentence?


          Yes, he is taking things out of context, from a language and tradition thousands of years in the past.

          These are moral questions. Are you saying that you cannot come up with a defence of what Jesus said?

          No, I'm saying that with such firmly held convictions, a person is less likely to change their mind about these things no matter how much I or anyone else says about these subjects. I could say that I'm right and that you're wrong, but what good would that do? We could argue the legalisms and morality of every law in the bible, but it would get us nowhere.

          Try his divorce law. I think it anti-love. Do you agree or not?
          Show your position in term of the morality of that law.


          I think it is perfectly moral to stick by someone you love, as a life-long commitment in view of marriage. Jesus said the only reason anyone should ever get divorced, is for adulterous behavior.

          I mean, people get married because they love each other, at first. Then come money problems, and petty differences with neither one willing to compromise.

          And money problems are the biggest reason most people get divorced, as far as I know. Everyone I am familiar with who has had a divorce, were for money problems, or problems that started over money and spilled over into other things. And really, it is usually both people in the marriage who are at fault. One for loving money more than their spouse, and the other for not watching what they are doing with their spending habits.

          Being a life-long commitment means sticking to it no matter what, and I think that through marriage God shows us what it is like for Him to have to put up with all of our "adulterous" behavior. He doesn't "divorce" us even though we sin against Him, because He loves us and wants to show us what real love is.

          Love is more than just a feeling, and marriage is more than just having children.

          1. profile image0
            Greatest I amposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            I figured that you would not discuss morals. You and your God have none.

            Regards
            DL

      2. A Troubled Man profile image60
        A Troubled Manposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        Testimony is useless, but evidence would be good enough.



        So is every other religion and god claimed to exist. So what?



        Or, more precisely, you have got your mind set that Jesus is God.



        Of course you can't, the spiritual aspect of has never been shown to exist.



        And yet, Christians lie about a great deal of things. We can observe that fact right here on these forums every day.

    3. profile image0
      Emile Rposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      I was bored enough to watch your video. I'll be honest and tell you I didn't watch the whole thing. Primarily because I didn't get the impression the gentleman fully understood the subject matter.

      His explanation of the 'turn the other cheek' teaching appeared off base. I don't think it was meant to involve turning a blind eye to the suffering of others, as he implies. What I got from Jesus' words were that you step up to the plate to help others.

      How this teaching works in real life is...You might offend my delicate sensibilities. What I need to do is turn my cheek, because maybe I need to think before reacting. Maybe my sensibilities are too delicate and I've got a chip on my shoulder. You 'insult' me again and I continue to pause to think. To attempt to find a better understanding of the exchange from an unbiased view.

      Joe, standing to the left and privy to the events, has a moral obligation to intercede. By the teachings of the same man. So, combined, the three parties have a better chance of discerning when a wrong has been committed. People work together from a position of caring for the individual. Ensuring no harm is done. Joe's obligation extends to a loss of his life in the pursuit of caring for me. By the teachings of the same man.

      I was also confused by his attempt to compare the idea of cosmic forgiveness with accountability to the law. Since the teachings of Jesus never involved comments on Roman law, it isn't a leap to see that he was speaking on a different level.  The laws society enacts and the punishments they mete out do not address the heart of the victim or the transgressor. We have no ability to do that. Our function, as a society, is to protect the physical well being of our citizens not the spiritual aspects.

      I think my primary problem with videos such as this one is that it is the yang of religion. He, as the religious, has cobbled together conclusions by picking and choosing points to consider and ignoring others; thus negating the broader picture.

      1. profile image0
        Greatest I amposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        “What I got from Jesus' words were that you step up to the plate to help others.”

        I agree. Most though seem to think he was advocating non-violent resistance a la Ghandi style.

        Regards
        DL

        1. Ceegen profile image84
          Ceegenposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          He did advocate passive-resistance; nonviolent actions. Before Constantine, there were no "Christian" military campaigns. Stephen was killed for his testimony, and Paul was beaten and left for dead on occasion. Plenty more of these examples to cite, if you like.

          1. profile image0
            Greatest I amposted 4 years ago in reply to this

            Constantine was already fighting Christians when he chose to buy Christianity.

            But this thread is on Jesus and the morality or immorality of his rhetoric.
            Shall we get to that?

            Regards
            DL

    4. PhoenixV profile image81
      PhoenixVposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      Because the video takes policies out of context right from the beginning means that by default the video supports personal revenge. So that is a good place to start.

      1. profile image0
        Greatest I amposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        And end nowhere if we only talk of the people.. Which policy is out of context?

        Regards
        DL

    5. Love virus profile image60
      Love virusposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      He was surely a great man, like Gandhi.

      1. profile image0
        Greatest I amposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        Only if the morality of his policies are shown.

        You have yet to do so.
        Pick one and let's have at it.

        Do you believe in human sacrifice for instance?

        Regards
        DL

  2. Jerami profile image77
    Jeramiposted 4 years ago

    Jesus Christ was the Messiah spoken of through out the OT.   As far as the RCC's rendition ???  the jury is still out in my mind.

    1. Jerami profile image77
      Jeramiposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      OK everybody  was just checking in before bed ...   tis 2:25 AM and am going to bed..  good night and don't let the bed bugs bite.

    2. profile image0
      Greatest I amposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      Jesus was a Jew and his messiahship was rejected by them because he did not fit their description. Their messiah was to live and lead, not die.

      Regards
      DL

      1. Ceegen profile image84
        Ceegenposted 4 years ago in reply to this

        They expected a conqueror, and they got one: Jesus conquered death. But the religious Jews were looking for someone who would conquer the world... Or at least set them free from Roman rule.

        1. profile image0
          Greatest I amposted 4 years ago in reply to this

          A dead conqueror cannot conquer.

          You have nothing that shows Jesus conquering anything.

          Regards
          DL

    3. profile image0
      Greatest I amposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      Jeramy

      You know that the Jews do not read their scriptures and myths literally. Right?

      If the originators do not, then it seems foolish for us to do so.

      Regards
      DL

  3. pisean282311 profile image58
    pisean282311posted 4 years ago

    @ts good topic...he was mad man?...many who came across him including his own family believed that...so it is quiet possible ...i think he was ordinary man who thought god would intervene and such stuffs...common among people of those times...even today few believe that so it wont be surprising to see 2k year old , least educated man who knew nothing about world , believe in such stuffs...

    1. profile image0
      Greatest I amposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      Yes. His brother James thought him a man.
      That is what is written in any case. Hard to tell if any of the tale is true.

      Regards
      DL

  4. Paul Wingert profile image79
    Paul Wingertposted 4 years ago

    Jesus was a guy that attacked religion, not start one. He had some success as a faith healer and gained a following by spreading the teachings of John he Baptist. All this son of god crap, virgin birth, and the fantastic stories that followed were invented by Paul (who never met Jesus) when he founded Christianity 30 years after Jesus died.

    1. profile image0
      Greatest I amposted 4 years ago in reply to this

      I agree that Jesus, if he existed at all was a man only.

      Regards
      DL

 
working