How could JESUS not be thought of as a DEMI-GOD? He couldn't!

by Terry 16 Replies latest watchtower beliefs

  • Terry
    Terry

    When you and I were born we started absorbing the beliefs and culture that surrounded us.

    As we grew older we absorbed the beliefs and cultures we experienced among our friends. If we moved to a new city or state or country we absorbed the customs and culture and language in order to be a part of society.

    Jehovah's Witness kids learn to Dis-believe along with what they believe.

    But, early in history among Jews and Pagans there was a sharp contrast of culture and belief. Jews were monotheistic. Pagans were inclined toward a pantheon of Gods and Demi-gods.

    How could you ever blend the two polar opposite belief systems? Is it unthinkable?

    1.Jews BEFORE the destruction of Jerusalem in 70 A.D. were stalwart montheists. After the Diaspora they went underground and Jewish-Christians were outnumbered by Pagan-Christians. These were people saturated with pagan culture and concepts. Jewish type monotheism would be unnatural and unthinkable to them.

    2.Christianity was a split 3-ways: Messianic Jews, Gentile-Christians, Pagan-christian hybrids.

    The world these three groups lived in was fluent in GREEK and ROMAN religious ideas, culture, practice and belief.

    Thus, we come to the idea of the DEMI-GOD and how Jesus might be construed in the pattern of this current belief universal.

    What was a Greek or Roman pagan referring to when he or she spoke about a DEMI-GOD?

    A demigod is a half mortal, half God. A demigod posses God like characteristic, in which some are humanly impossible, or exaggerations in which a mortal couldn't obtain; however posses certain mortal characteristics which leaves them vulnerable by mortal standards.

    How do Christians defend against the accusation that Jesus fit the definition of a Demi-God?

    Christians shaped their rebuttals over time until, after many debates, arguments and conferences they INVENTED an Ad Hoc definition.

    How does this refute the Demi-God definition?

    Jesus is asserted out of necessity into being FULLY god and FULLY human BOTH simultaneously!

    Christians can say--"Look, a demi-god is HALF-God and Half-Human; Jesus isn't! It is a silly and disengenuous scheme. But, it works for them.

    Why would Christians who were originally Jewish ever accept such a pagan definition into their monotheistic religion?

    Tribal Jews absorbed into Greek culture against their will just as they were absorbed into Persian and Babylonian culture previously. The Jews born into a new culture cannot help but pick up the language and customs no matter how hard their parents may resist.

    Alexander the Great conquered the known world and spread Greek religious ideas along with language. In a relatively short time (a few Centuries) Jews could not even speak Hebrew any longer. This is the main reason their scriptures were forced into the Greek language. (Septuagint).

    What sort of demi-gods were Jews exposed to? What were the stories and characteristics they'd hear about and absorb into their thinking?

    Internationally, the list of demi-gods is quite extensive:

    Were any of these demi-gods also BORN OF A VIRGIN
    ?

    Roman/Greek: Demeter and Persephone, Rhea and Zeus, Apollo

    In Egypt, virgin mother Isis begat Horus

    In Phrygia, Attis was born of the virgin Nama.

    A nymph bathing in a river in China is touched by a lotus plant, and the divine Fohi is born.

    In Siam, a wandering sunbeam caresses a girl in her teens, and the great and wonderful deliverer, Codom, is born.

    In the life of Buddha we read that he descended on his mother Maya, "in likeness as the heavenly queen, and entered her womb," and was born from her right side, to save the world."

    In Greece, the young god Apollo visits a fair maid of Athens, and a Plato is ushered into the world.

    From Greece comes the virgin birth of Adonis, who was resurrected after being killed by a wild boar. Adonis was revered by the Phoenicians as a dying-and-rising god, and Athenians held Adonia, a yearly festival representing his death and resurrection, in midsummer.

    From the Americas comes a remarkable story of the god-man Quetzalcoatl told by the Aztecs and Mayans. Not only did he have a virgin birth, but he was associated with the planet Venus, the morning star, as was Jesus. In addition, the religion built around him used the cross as a symbolic representation. Like the myths around Jesus, Quetzalcoatl said he would return to claim his earthly kingdom.

    Mithra was a Persian god who was also a virgin birth, but was more than just a tribal god. Mithra was born in a cave and had twelve companions. Mithra's birthday was also on December 25th. Both religions celebrate the resurrection at Easter. Much of what we know about Mithracism today came from the Christians. The prophet Zoroaster was also born of a virgin.

    Perseus and Hercules all experienced virgin births after being fathered by yet other gods. Horus, Mithra, Dionysus and Krishna were all born on December 25th., their births were announced by "stars", attended by 'wise men', involved humble birth locations, entailed the massacre of innocents and fleeing for safety from enemies, and so on and on.

    A Roman savior Quirrnus was born of a virgin.

    In Tibet, Indra was born of a virgin. He ascended into heaven after death.

    In India, the god Krishna was born of the virgin Devaki.

    Virgin births were claimed for many Egyptian pharaohs, Greek emperors and for Alexander the Great of Greece.

    Should we be suspicious that Jesus so neatly fits the pagan pattern of things?

    Is there any alternate explanation
    ?

    Yes, we could naively assert it is JUST COINCIDENCE that Jesus happened to be born of a virgin, have the powers of a god, be part of a Trinity.

    But, wasn't Jesus different than all those pagan deities and demi-gods?

    A pagan/Gentile/Greek speaking person would hear "Son of God" and think Demi-God as naturally as anything.

    Arguments between pagan greeks and christianized pagans would produce contra-dictions and require answers.

    The attacks and accusations between Romans and Christians would revolve around the PRECISE definition of just who it was they were worshipping EXCLUSIVELY. Romans accused Christians of being Atheist because they had warped (in their view) the definition of what worship itself was all about.

    Committees of arguing christians shaped their definitions of Jesus gradually into being different just-enough to hold him up as superior.

    These are differences of ad hoc explanations purely invented to get themselves out of a theological jam.

    Remember, the Council of Nicea was convoked to settle differences of opinion and to create an aritficial agreement and orthodoxy.

    Judaism had faded after 70 A.D. and the Pagan Christian had superceded the Jewish Christian.

    Catholic doctrine superceded early Judeo-christian proto-belief by making Orthodoxy "pure" and other belief Heresy.
    What conclusion can be reached about the nature of Jesus in terms of Greek and Roman and Egyptian and Persian and Babylonian myth?

    Christian myth was built right along the same lines using the same proto-types and template.

    Any differences were artificially created to make Jesus a "better brand name".

    In our modern world today, Jesus is a brand name marketed as being vastly superior to any ancient pagan pantheon of trinities, demi-gods or deities. This is the Jesus you and I grew up with.

    But, if we are honest about the historical/cultural evolutionary pressure on believers in Jesus we can see how pagan concepts filled in, fleshed in and contaminated the early working-definition of who Jesus would ultimately become.

    Jesus was a demi-god, then a "fully-human/fully god" non-hybrid, then a Trinity.

  • JWoods
    JWoods

    A very good reason that some choose not to buy into the entire concept (except perhaps for the basis of moral teaching).

  • Chalam
    Chalam

    Hello Terry,

    This sums it up for me.

    Philippians 2:5-7 (English Standard Version)

    5 Have this mind among yourselves, which is yours in Christ Jesus, 6 who, though he was in the form of God, did not count equality with God a thing to be grasped, 7 but made himself nothing, taking the form of a servant, being born in the likeness of men.

    Or this

    John 1:1 (New International Version)

    1 In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

    John 1:14 (New International Version)

    14 The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the One and Only, [ a ] who came from the Father, full of grace and truth.

    Or this

    Hebrews 1:3 (New International Version)

    3 The Son is the radiance of God's glory and the exact representation of his being, sustaining all things by his powerful word. After he had provided purification for sins, he sat down at the right hand of the Majesty in heaven.

    Blessings,

    Stephen

  • Terry
    Terry

    What makes the Christian definition of God, Jesus, Son, Holy Spirit and Trinity so ungraspable in a rational way is

    the fact it is a definition BY COMMITTEE!

    Think of the Healthcare Debate in Congress as an example.

    Thousands of pages nobody can understand or explain!

    Yet, one side (with the power to vote it through) is ready to rubber-stamp it into law EVEN WHEN IT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE to anybody!

    This is how a bureaucracy works.

    Scripture is by committee, canon is by committee and Jesus is too.

    For 2000 years the Catholic bureaucracy dominated the world with Ad Hoc pronouncements of what was TRUTH and pure worship.

    Then, Protestants tore that up and invented their own AD HOC way of shaping Jesus, God, the Bible and pure worship.

    Modern Day Christianity is deuces-wild, anything goes, brand name denominational vamping on the same themes.

    Christianity is a buffet lunch in a Smorgasbord eatery. You pick and choose what to put on your plate and you leave the rest behind!

    Do-it-yourself or do nothing.

  • garyneal
    garyneal
    You pick and choose what to put on your plate and you leave the rest behind!

    This does seem pretty accurate in many senses. Orthodox Christianity appears to assert the Trinity, salvation by grace, confession that Jesus is Lord, the Bible is the infallible Word of God, and dedication via Baptism as its core doctrines (did I miss anything?). Everything else is peripheral.

    Your statement that I quoted is especially interesting because this is exactly how Sylvia Browne promotes her brand of Gnostic Christianity (Novus Spiritus).

  • thetrueone
    thetrueone

    Good write up Terry, informative and enjoyable.

    "Christianity is a buffet lunch in a Smörgåsbord eatery".............got remember that one !

  • sacolton
    sacolton

    I guess we'll just find out when we die.

    If NOTHING happens = No one is the wiser. No one gets rewarded or punished. We all become fertilizer.

    If CHRIST happens = Let Him judge.

  • Terry
    Terry

    I started this topic especially for Perry to peruse.

  • designs
    designs

    After the Bishops got done with their editing job of the NT what do you expect but glossolalia

  • Terry
    Terry

    I think the point is this. We fit things into our preconceived world view as best we can.

    We have categories for things. We have conceptual place settings. We encounter something "new" and we

    have to PUT it some where. What does it look like? Does it quack like a duck? Maybe it is a duck.

    Sometimes it isn't a duck. But, it does quack.

    If you were living in the Greco-Roman world in the first century and you were a Gentile you already had a world view and a category

    for where you could put:

    1. A son of God

    2. A born-of-a-virgin larger-than-life character.

    3.Somebody who dies and comes back to life

    For you, this must be a duck. A demi-duck:)

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit