Mad, that discovery is pretty ground breaking for me. I really do feel that "let us make man in our image" could very well have been originally written to be spoken by husband-wife Gods.
-Sab
by sabastious 26 Replies latest watchtower beliefs
Mad, that discovery is pretty ground breaking for me. I really do feel that "let us make man in our image" could very well have been originally written to be spoken by husband-wife Gods.
-Sab
The movement had to have started out centered around SOMEbody, IMO. I think the discussion should focus on the likelihood that the written records we have from decades later (at best) are accurate or embellished. Was there a guy with some followers? Almost HAD TO be. What did he REALLY say and do? That's the question.
Almost HAD TO be. What did he REALLY say and do? That's the question.
I was having this discussion with a friend a few days ago. He believes in Biblical inerrancy and I was trying to explain to him that the Gospels have different and contradictory facts about the same accounts. Logically then, we should conclude that they were not meant to be a historical accounts. The stories were meant to be "flavoured" because they had to be given the circumstance of Jesus' followers (illiterate).
Jesus message of love is pretty illuminated within the Bible, at least from my vantage point, even with the contradictions so why do we insist on treating his words like we have them on tape?
-Sab
Mad,
It's always hard to get a 100% accurate picture of any historical figure, but the best way to do it is to treat him like any other historical figure and use the same "measuring stick" for authenticity.
Fact is that we have writings about Jesus and what he said and did, from both pros and cons and quite recent in terms of historical significance.
We have writings from direct apostles, direct converts and those that were very close to the apostles, even those whos jobs were to "take notes".
We have the writings of people from HIS time, from the first direct generations from His Time, we even have writings that adivce those reading to verify the story for themselves since eyewitnesses were still around, quite a few at times.
The oldest documents we have date to 100 years after his death ( which means that copies were circulating outside of Jerusalem by that time already), the oldest COMPLETE works we have date to 300 years after his death, that is VERY RECENT in terms of historical evidence and is very comparable to other historical figures, perhaps more so in some cases.
To attempt to pull this thread out of the common superficial fluff that it appears to be falling into
Phew! Good think you took the wheel or I don't know what would have happened.
-Sab
Phew! Good think you took the wheel or I don't know what would have happened.
BBWWWAHAHHHH !!!!!
So, let's keep in mind that it may appear simple in Jesus teachings, it is the exact opposite in reality, it is a trial by fire to follow Jesus Christ acceptably, and the reward is commensurate with that great challenge.
20 Just then a woman who had been subject to bleeding for twelve years came up behind him and touched the edge of his cloak. 21 She said to herself, “If I only touch his cloak, I will be healed.”
22 Jesus turned and saw her. “Take heart, daughter,” he said, “your faith has healed you.” And the woman was healed at that moment.
^ This woman had no reason to believe that touching Jesus would do anything. For all she knew he was viper trying to gain political advantage. She passed through no wall of flame or trial of fire to gain Christ's approval. It was that she reached out and touched his cloak and that was enough for him.
-Sab
Don't waste your typing muscles Sab, its pointless with that individual.
I do believe that Jesus's message of Love was but a starting point, notice how he took what was "common" like the "golden rule" and took it beyond that ( as he did with other parts) to the "love and pray for they enemies".
It is quite clear that unconditional love is the greatest of forces and truly cna chnage the world for the better and that without it, the Gospel of Christ does NOT bare fruit ( as we have seen here by some posters and they lack of love and militant posting style that actuall turns people away from the Gospel).
I thnk Jesus' message is simply that he had zero tolerance for religions that tried to oppress people. And he didn't care if Jehovah was the oppressor. Jesus wanted people to be free from Jehovah.
Incidentally, Satan's message, when stripped of what Jehovah added, is exactly the same--as was his purpose.
The scientific way to work out what Jesus meant is to take the three synoptic gopels, and discard whatever doesn't appear in all three. What is left is the hypothetical 'Q' document. Simple.