question about jesus as prophet or moral teacher - to xtians/athiests

i have a question...


how can people claim that jesus was only a man and teacher, and a good one at that, when clearly if he wasn't the son of god he must have been, though well-intentioned, a lunatic imposter.

fair enough if the koran leaves out the parts where jesus claims to be the son of god, and follows a story of his life as a messenger of god, but i've heard some atheists claim that jesus was simply a wise man, and i assume they base that upon the bible.

how can the jesus of the bible, when rejected as god, still be maintained as a good and reasonable teacher and moral guide?

...clearly any christians answering will say that jesus was not simply a man and teacher, but i'm looking for some more reasoning.
i figured this should be in the christianity forum because of the subject matter.

peace,
sophia

 

Perhaps your understanding of 'the son of god' is a bit narrow...

'Son of God', 'Messiah', and 'Anointed One' are all synonyms within Hebrew tradition. Many Christians do not know this, but King David of the old testament was also known as a 'son of god'. There were other sages within Judaism who also held the same title.

Dare it be said, counter to orthodoxy, that it is very possible that the 'son of god' label shared by Jesus and David was, within tradition, the same. In other words, 'son of god' does not necessarily imply what some modern Christians tend to believe it does.

 

Someone has to be God to be a moral teacher/wise man?


Jesus doen't claim to be God, except in that he is the son of God, as we all are, and when he says "I and the Father are one". I would argue that this is true for all of us, but Jesus realized it and experienced that one-ness. Unless you like to think of God as some kingly spirit-person sitting on a cloud (a rather small idea of God, if you ask me), I don't see a problem with this.

As far as other people (Paul, for example) in their letters considering Jesus to be God, well, that's their delusion.

I'm not an atheist or a Christian, but that's my two cents.

 

what about jesus' own statements regarding his godliness... his statments of "believe in me and ye shall be saved"... or are you saying that he was misquoted?

 

no.... not at all. jesus could easily be seen by the non-religious as a good moral teacher/wise man if he did not make statements about himself as being god brought down to earth from the heavens, and making statements about all people having to believe in him to achieve salvation.

 

like, he could have been misquoted? what BTM suggested was interesting.

 

Perhaps Jesus was just a wise man, a teacher, and a discoverer of the inner potential, the inner light of humanity and its place in this existence. Perhaps it just didn't click with the disciples. Even Buddha's disciples argued amongst themselves and split up into a few 'divisions' of belief.

Who's to say that, if he were to discover his inner potential, man is not capable of walking on water?

 

i see what you're saying...

but what of his supposed claims then, as recorded in the christian bible, that all people must accept that he saved us from our sins, or we will perish in hell for all eternity?

 

Indeed, who's to say what had been said? Perhaps, as I stated before, the disciples did not understand the message of Jesus - like Buddha before him. Perhaps they twisted his message, unintentionally, into something a bit grander-scaled and far fetched? Imagine you are a simple fisherman, living in Jerusalem, with the world around you as it always had been. Your beliefs are simple and your life is honorable. Growing up like this, how would you feel about seeing a person walk on water? Would it be so easy for you to believe you could do this too? With all the religious upbringing you were raised by, would you not believe this man to be something great? Holy?

What if he meant that, if we did not awaken to our inner light, if we did not stop our ignorance and selfishness and learn the truth of love, we would ultimately consume ourselves in self-destruction, binding ourselves to a life of suffering? Perhaps he described it in a way they would understand at the time.

Did he not also say that the kingdom of heaven is here? That it is smaller than a mustard seed? Oh, there are beautiful messages forgotten within this wonderful book as well, my friend.

 

a beautiful post...


thanks.


peace,
sophia

 

Jesus himself never proclaimed to be god. Remember that Jesus himself did not write any of the bible, and the gospels were not recorded for decades after his death.

If you look carefully at the New Testament, as biblical scholars have done, you will see that there is a dramatic difference between the image of Jesus portrayed within Matthew, Mark, and Luke (the synoptics) and the image of him portrayed within the book of John.

According to John, Jesus spoke often and openly about his divine identity. However, according to Mark, still judged to be the earliest gospel by most scholars, Jesus never procliamed an exalted identity as a part of his public teaching or preaching. Throughout the book, the proclamation of the saving purpose of his death was not the message of Jesus.

Thus there is a fundamental contrast between John and Mark. Either Jesus openly proclaimed his divine identity and saving purpose (John), or he did not (Mark). Jesus could not consistently proclaim his identity and at the same time not do so. So which image of Jesus is more likely to be accurate? The nearly universal answer given by scholars is 'Mark'.

So what to make of the gospel of John then? John's gospel comes out of the experience of the Christian community in the decades after Jesus' death. John's gospel is the church's memory transfigured.

The projection of divine qualities back onto Jesus is very ancient. Looking at the book of Matthew, Jesus does not proclaim 'The Great Commission' (go baptize all nations in the trinity...) until after he 'came back from the dead'.
Not only can this be seen within the New Testament itself, but it is especially prominent in what are known as the 'apocryphal' gospels. There, Jesus as an infant is already portrayed as having superhuman knowledge and power. From his crib he points at animals and makes them talk; as a five year old he makes clay birds and turns them into real birds.

 

My thinking is that if he is rejected as God, then there is really nothing at all to be gained from the Bible. Where morals are concerned, Christ didn't utter a single moral commandment which hadn't been previously formulated by Socrates etc. in the west, and many Buddhist and Hindu thinkers in the east.
Also, if he wasn't either God or Son of God, then he wasn't very wise perhaps to throw away his life?
But it stands to reason that if he wasn't a divine of some sort, then clearly, he wasn't really either good or wise, as he introduced a pack of lies which have had a major impact on human history, and led to others throwing their lives away too, and much persecution etc.

 

i have a question. how the hell did 'x' become the abbv. for christ? that just annoys the hell out of me.

 

Either what Jesus said was true...or he was a big fat lier.

 

The discussion is rather about what did he say than if he was truthful or not.
And you, your self testified that what he said was true and I presume therfore that you adhere to it and accept it aswell.

"that they may know you, the only true God, and Jesus Christ, whom you have sent." John 17:3

By myself I can do nothing; I judge only as I hear, and my judgment is just, for I seek not to please myself but him who sent me John 5.30

Do you know what you call someone who is sent. I will give you a hint, it starts with "p". Let see if the bible menions it:

The crowds answered, “This is Jesus, the prophet from Nazareth in Galilee.” Matthew 21:11

It finally comes down to this. Should we believe what other people said about him or what he himself did? Should we ask him for our fire insurence from this man or the one who sent him?

Jesus answered, “It is written: ‘Worship the Lord your God and serve him only. Luke 4.8

 

Jesus also talked about being the Messiah. And he also talked about getting everyone to worship him.
The Koran also stated he was sinnless right?

 

Yes it does and yes he is the messiah, son of Mary. I agree 100% ^^

No, acually he didn't. The worshipping of him was not issued by him at all but rather by higher priests after his departure. Instead, he always commanded us to worship God and not him, the Creator and not the creation.

All the prophets were saved from major sins though they could commit minor mistakes such as Adam(peace be upon him) eating from the tree but we deny that any of them ever commited large sins as the bible states -such as Lot(peace be upon him) having sex with his daughters, David(peace be upon him) seeing a naked woman bathing and then sleeping with her though she is married and Solomon(peace be upon him) worshipping other gods- these things we do not accept.

 

ah, the X

in greek, the first letter of "christos" (= "the annointed one") was the letter "chi", written as X

Chi
Rho
Io
Sigma
Tau


i think - i never took greek, heh...

~
now, as to who this crucified carpenter rabbi, this one called messiah by 2 billion christians, IS, or thought he was, or was held to be by his jewish apostles, or came to be regarded by by their gentile disciples, and so and so, down to our times...
well, that's what makes this subject all so interesting, now, innit?
(if you like this sorta thing, heh... but, please --- just nothing to kill for, mmkay? to die for - well, that's another story now, maybe... sez me...)


anyways, there's a lotta "models" out there for who this jesus fella was, mmmm?

 

oh, and the ancient christian "fish" symbol:
Iasos
Christos
Theos
is sorta close to greek "ichtheus" = fish...

 

I personally see jesus as a moral guide. My thinking is this: Whether he did miracles or not is irrelevant. It doesn't matter if the bible misrepresents his words or not. It doesn't even matter if he ever existed. What matters is that the man jesus, as depicted in the bible, was a kind, loving, and generally good person. That makes him a good role model. It's kind of like thinking "wow, robin hood was a great guy, I wanna be like him." He probably didn't exist, but his ideals were good.