John 1:1—a concept blindly copied from other cultures

by Ireneus 7 Replies latest watchtower bible

• 

  Ireneus

  John 1:1 is the adaptation from other cultures where it is taught that we are all gods. If expanded, John 1:1 would read like this: “In the beginning there was only God and He created the universe out of Himself. That means you are made out of God and you are a part of God, hence you are God just as much as Jesus was. And everything we see in the universe is the manifestation of God.”
  

  In the East it is taught that everyone is god, which means it is God who experiences everything as He has fragmented Himself to reside within the heart of all of His creatures. This is a god-dishonoring teaching because if God resides in everyone’s heart, or if everyone is god, then it would mean the rapist and the one who is raped would be one and the same.

  Without knowing such implication, Bible writer named John adopted John 1:1. Obviously this can’t be inspired verse as it has created so much of confusion and controversies. And even after 2000 years of debate, no consensus is reached. And also, in the East, such teaching was formulated to counter the higher castes who were treating the lower castes as though worse than slaves [which means this teaching arose not as part of any divine teaching program].
• 

  Doug Mason

  Ireneus,

  I am bemused by your characterising the writers of the Johannine Gospel as doing anything "blindly".

  The Johannine community had been expelled from the synagogue community over their High Christology, so they were very conscious of their position.

  The Jews did not exist in a vacuum and they were not isolated from the external influences, the greatest of which was and remained the Hellenistic. This is exemplified by their need to translate the Scriptures into Greek (the LXX) and is demonstrated by the impact on Paul's thinking.

  The earliest "Gospel", which was Mark's, made no mention of Jesus' birth but this was followed by Matthew and then Luke, who started Jesus' life with his natural birth. The Johannine's, however, started earlier and they harked back to the origin of Creation. (One good myth deserves another.)

  Regards,

  Doug
• 

  Ireneus

  Hi Doug Mason, thank you for that insight into Johannine community!

  When we compare all myths from around the world, we find amazing similarities. Without realizing this, most people are stuck with the details, hence miss out on the essence. If anyone wants to know the truth, he can even without any external help.

  If anyone doesn’t want to know the truth, then even any amount of external help would not help.

  After my comparative studies, what I have understood is this. Religious leaders wrongly assumed knowledge of God would help people to be good citizens. But it would notbecause we find people of the religions still continue to be egoistic, root of all evil. This explains why God remains unidentified.

  If knowledge of God doesn’t help, then what would help? It is the knowledge about ‘Who I am’ that helps us. For this we don’t have to go anywhere as rightly understood by Carl Jung: “Who looks outside, dreams; who looks inside, awakes.”

  See what happens when we look beyond thinking ability. “The moment you start watching the thinker, a higher level of consciousness becomes activated. You then begin to realize that there is a vast realm of intelligence beyond thought, that thought is only a tiny aspect of that intelligence. You also realize that all the things that truly matter — beauty, love, creativity, joy, inner peace — arise from beyond the mind. You begin to awaken.” (The Power of Now, Ekhart Tolle) Many scientific discoveries (such as Periodic Table, Aromatic Chemistry, Insulin …) have their roots in dreams. (http://dreamtraining.blogspot.com/2010/12/inventions-that-came-in-dreams-largest.html) Even Einstein’s great invention of Theory of Relativity is connected with two dreams he had. (Einstein: A Life by Denis Brian p.159)

  In view of the above, the primary knowledge everyone should have is this: “I am a soul with vast intellectual and insightful ability to guide myself with knowledge of what is right and what is wrong.” This primary knowledge can make the difference of heaven and hell! If you remember only half truth, and say you are this transient body, you are inviting hell for you because you would then want to enjoy and accumulate as much as possible within the available period with the attitude that “let us eat and drink, for to-morrow we shall die.” Such insatiable greed has made this earth into a hell: “The world’s eight richest billionaires control the same wealth between them as the poorest half of the globe’s population” (www.theguardian.com/global-development/2017/jan/16) which may remind us the famous idiom “dog in the manger”—an attitude of accumulating excessively whereas many are deprived of the same [which is against the Bible’s command: “Anyone who has two shirts should share with the one who has none, and anyone who has food should do the same”—Luke 3:11]. In contrast, when you realize that “I am immaterial and immortal soul, and this is my body which I use as my vehicle, focus is changed from transient body onto the eternal life we already have. And it is everyone’s experience that body is activated when soul enters and becomes a corpse when it exits, and everything happens according to some unerring law, which makes a person responsible-minded. In such knowledge, there is acceptance (peace), and in peace one interacts with others lovingly result of which is joy. This is the whole essence of Christianity (Mathew 25:31-46)
• 

  Doug Mason

  Hi Ireneus,

  I am in no way saying whether I support what the superstitious, either ancient or modern, thought or wrote. I look at their works dispassionately, objectively.

  As for religion, I see it providing a means for a few people to use superstition in order to control and exploit the masses.

  This is why it is so important to read and to study the religious writings and to treat any religion with scepticism.

  That is, of course, my view and it shows that I fully respect the right of each and every person to their views. We can disagree, as is absolutely natural, but we must not be disagreeable. One need only look at the outcomes when members of one religious philosophy disagree with another -- wars in the name of their God.

  As for John 1:1-18, identify its core message by creating the chiasm formed by those 18 verses. The focus is not John 1:1.

  Doug
• 

  venus

  In Luke 7:19 we read:

  So John called two of hisdisciples and sent them to ask the Lord, “AreYou the One who was to come, or should we look for someone else?”

  In John 1:32-34 we read:

  Then John gave this testimony: “I saw the Spirit come down from heaven as a dove and remain on him. And I myself did not know him, but the one who sent me to baptize with water told me, ‘The man on whom you see the Spirit come down and remain is the one who will baptize with the Holy Spirit.’ I have seen and I testify that this is God’s Chosen One.”
  

  This shows John Gospel writer has no idea about what John the Baptist had already admitted in public which means this gospel writer was just creating stories. If John 1:32-34 were true, then what Luke reported would not happen.
• 

  Doug Mason

  An interesting observation, Venus, and one with several explanations.

  One view would be that the firebrand "end is upon us" John the Baptist either felt disillusioned that his expectations had not been met, and he simply needed confirmation, especially as his cousin Yeshua (Joshua aka Jesus) was also expecting the imminent divine intervention.

  Another view would be that Luke was denigrating the party that was following The Baptist, therefore the authors of Luke (writing about 60 years after said event) created this passage in order to belittle The Baptist's followers.

  We see that method employed by the writers of John's Gospel (20:24 ff) when they denigrated the followers of Thomas (John 20:24ff). The Gospel of Thomas had been circulating for decades before the John Gospel was created.

  These writers were astute and highly political (in religious terms). Each party wrote in order to promote their own ideology and at the same time to argue against the views of others. Hence we are exposed only to the views of a writer and we have to infer what their opponents were saying. This is true, not only of the Canonised writings but also of later writers, such as the Church Fathers.

  Doug
• 

  TTWSYF

  Interesting topic, generally speaking, about biblical stories copying older pagan beliefs. Many pagan communities were pagan, only to become closer to the divine. They knew [at least,] that there was more to know spiritually than they knew so they would try to gain a knowledge of divinity, but had not received these types of revelations. They could have stumbled upon or had been taught truths during their journeys.

  Remember the saying -even a broken clock is right twice a day
• 

  venus

  Hi Doug Mason

  You put it perfectly: "Each party wrote in order to promote their own ideology and at the same time to argue against the views of others. Hence we are exposed only to the views of a writer" not to the thoughts of God.