Old Question Revisited - Who is Jesus?

Welcome to Wondercafe2!

A community where we discuss, share, and have some fun together. Join today and become a part of it!

Register Log in
chansen said:
Are you high?!? Where have I even hinted at that?
Click to expand...

Lol! No. High on listening to some music at the moment, though...walking down memory lane.

Isn't it you who so often appeals to sources of authority in order to verify an opinion. With science that works. It has to. With faith, not so much. Scholars can be a guide but they never have the last word on something that can't be categorized or quantified as fact.
 
(I wasn't sure which thread to put this in. Several will do. Whoa, what a spiritual moment of coincidence.) This is relevant.


And a musical accompaniment:
 
Last edited:
This was all part of my journey, guiding me, before I knew I was on one. I was listening to this, and it was really powerful. It moved me. I had no 'religion', then, so it was a rather unorthodox journey, but I have faith now. Who'd ever think people could get anything spiritual and biblically relevant from Pearl Jam- looking wild and unkempt- whose lead singer is agnostic? We are not alone. We are connected beings on this earth. So, God and faith work in mysterious ways. There are no textbook answers.
 
Last edited:
I LOVE THAT SONG!!!

an old friend of mine that that on cassette tape...and when i got permission to drive his car, i'd plug that into the tape deck, roll down the windows, and turn it up to the highest and unashamedly belt out to the song while driving wherever i was going...

LET YOUR FREAK FLAG FLY
(as this conference of atheists, agnostics and deeply religious shows)
 
Kimmio said:
Lol! No. High on listening to some music at the moment, though...walking down memory lane.

Isn't it you who so often appeals to sources of authority in order to verify an opinion. With science that works. It has to. With faith, not so much. Scholars can be a guide but they never have the last word on something that can't be categorized or quantified as fact.
Click to expand...

I make every effort to back up what I say and cite my sources where applicable. If that's a strike against me, then I'm at a loss for what to do. Make my posts worse? Run them through a word scambler prior to posting? Type in gangsta?

I don't have an MDiv and I've never demanded one of anybody, except Berserk, who claimed his degrees gave him legitimacy while providing no proof they existed. If anyone has any idea what Kimmio is talking about, let me know and I'll gladly swallow my words.
 
You have told me before that you will accept some of the Revs opinions but don't think mine are credible. Fair enough. They are way more studied in the Bible and theology than I. I think in most cases it was their faith journey that led them to study, not their studying that led them to faith.
 
You make s**t up! Constantly. You don't like Revelation, so you ignore it! And *poof* It's gone.

At least the revs try to explain it, or make excuses for it. You think you can dislike it out of existence. You have your own religion - that's what I've been trying to tell you. You call it Christianity, but it's not Christianity.
 
crazyheart said:
What power does Kimmio have, inanna?
Click to expand...

the power we all have that the bibble has written aboot

the power to create

from nothing

meaning & purpose & ideas & concepts & hopes & fears & uglyness & mercy & justice & prejudices & word usages & insults & countries & etc etc etc

that we are taught to, because this power is so frightening, because we are taught to be afraid of our own light (remember that Lucifer was g_d's favourite), we hang up our power to certain authorities...'the bibble', 'our parents', 'that person insulted me', 'i'm not feeling well today', 'its the economy, stupid'

we are so powerful, human beings, that governments have to account for it in their activities, that organized religions have tried to harness it, that certain organizations have tried to guide it...the NSA is trying to keep it in check, ferinstance...

Kimmio makes s**t up.

We all do.

That's our power.

We are all creators.

So let's continue to make s**t up.

A-men
A-women
A-other

*thanks Kimmio's & crazyheart's HS*
 
chansen said:
You make s**t up! Constantly. You don't like Revelation, so you ignore it! And *poof* It's gone.

At least the revs try to explain it, or make excuses for it. You think you can dislike it out of existence. You have your own religion - that's what I've been trying to tell you. You call it Christianity, but it's not Christianity.
Click to expand...

Who are you to tell me it's not Christianity? Have you looked at the emergent movement at all? What I believe is not "orthodox" Christianity. That's for sure. There has never been one interpretation probably since right after Jesus' crucifixion. You do know it's been interpreted and reinterpreted before, many times, right? Heck, the first followers didn't even have a New Testament. So, you can insist that the ones who interpret it closer to the way you do, except they believe it - have the right interpretation but it's bad. Fine. But what is a Christian? Why do you get to define it? And why am I caring right now what you think of me?


John 21:25 I take as permission to liberally interpet my faith. It's in the Bible.
 
Last edited:
Fine chansen: If you want to think being creative and open to new ways of looking at things is 'making s**t up', then so be it. I'll take it as a compliment. If you want to call me 'not a Christian' because of that, fine. But don't call me a disgrace to Christianity. I don't believe in rigid interpretations of the Bible. I don't think that defines what a "Christian" is. I believe in God, Jesus and the Holy Spirit - which I believe leads us on different journeys to understanding God. Because we don't all start from the same perspective to begin with. What you want to call me is up to you.
 
chansen said:
You make s**t up! Constantly. You don't like Revelation, so you ignore it! And *poof* It's gone.

At least the revs try to explain it, or make excuses for it. You think you can dislike it out of existence. You have your own religion - that's what I've been trying to tell you. You call it Christianity, but it's not Christianity.
Click to expand...

Maybe the revs can confirm that Revelation is likely a dream/ poetic vision. It was written about a persons hopes/ fears/ feelings/ predictions about what was happening at that time. Maybe they can also confirm that it was not the last book written in the bible. It was only placed last. And I'm not the only one who doesn't like it. And there are a lot of Christians who read the bible less than I, who don't read it at all, who's faith is not much to do with the bible directly, but sermons on biblical themes or other things of interest to them... and so...why are you picking on me? Stop. Don't do it again, please.
 
Last edited:
Kimmio said:
Maybe the revs can confirm that Revelation is likely a dream/ poetic vision.
Click to expand...

That description would probably fit the definition for the crowd that thinks the book speaks to future events/times.

Not so much for the crowd that thinks it was more current events and written during a time of great persecution.

Kimmio said:
It was written about a persons hopes/ fears/ feelings/ predictions about what was happening at that time.
Click to expand...

I don't think prediction applies (unless you are the future events/times camp).

Kimmio said:
Maybe they can also confirm that it was not the last book written in the bible.
Click to expand...

Depends on which scholar you listen to. Broadest consensus is around CE 96. Certain textual references suggest something before the destruction of the Jerusalem temple in CE 70 and others place it during the reign of Nero (CE 54-68) If it is considered predictive then it would be written slightly earlier than the time of Nero.

Kimmio said:
It was only placed last.
Click to expand...

The New Testament Canon is not set chronologically by the writing of each book. The Book of Revelation has historically always been challenged as far as whether or not it should be included in the canon. Both Luther and Calvin thought about dropping it when they compiled their respective Bibles. Ultimately neither could find sufficient cause to exclude it and they were far from happy to include it.

Luther softened towards the book as he got older. Calvin pretty much ignored it though his death may be the actual reason for the lack of commentary on this book in particular.
 
What I was suggesting is that it was someone's nightmare/ dream about what was happening or their fears and hopes about what was happening in their time - as in, things were pretty darn difficult and they had enemies persecuting them, and the Book of Revelation poetically expresses that - it was never written to be taken literally - it was poetic/ allegorical expression - about things that happened already/ happening around them then. Maybe warnings based on what they could see happening - poetically expressed - is a better way to say it than 'predictions'. Is that off base in your opinion? Because I've come to believe that's what it likely was. Somebody had a dream with a lot of symbolism in it and they wrote it down- or they made it up, like a poem. I have read Revelations...and I don't like it...because I witness some Christians getting a little crazed about it, more than any other book in the bible...and almost working for it to come true. And when you see what's happening in the world, that's disconcerting. I wish they hadn't included it. There's something not quite right about it.
 
Last edited:
revjohn said:
That description would probably fit the definition for the crowd that thinks the book speaks to future events/times.

Not so much for the crowd that thinks it was more current events and written during a time of great persecution.

I don't think prediction applies (unless you are the future events/times camp).



Depends on which scholar you listen to. Broadest consensus is around CE 96. Certain textual references suggest something before the destruction of the Jerusalem temple in CE 70 and others place it during the reign of Nero (CE 54-68) If it is considered predictive then it would be written slightly earlier than the time of Nero.


The New Testament Canon is not set chronologically by the writing of each book. The Book of Revelation has historically always been challenged as far as whether or not it should be included in the canon. Both Luther and Calvin thought about dropping it when they compiled their respective Bibles. Ultimately neither could find sufficient cause to exclude it and they were far from happy to include it.

Luther softened towards the book as he got older. Calvin pretty much ignored it though his death may be the actual reason for the lack of commentary on this book in particular.
Click to expand...

So even two great theologians thought about dropping it. Calvin likely ignored it? And there were Christians in existence long before that decision was made by either one of them. Long before the New Testament was bound together...because they were there to choose what went into it... So chansen is making the assumption that every Christian must have read and accepted Revelation, to call themselves Christian, and that no 'real' Christians ever struggle with some of the 'uglier' stories, either. Not true.

And there were many Christians who never read all the stories, before they were all written down. And times when only priests had access. People got bits and pieces told to them orally. And they were Christians...
 
Last edited:
Hi Rev John, just going over your last post again. A point I forgot to make is that I already knew the books weren't written chronologically, their placement was decided. And so, an apocalyptic book which is complex to try to interpret, placed at 'the end' has an effect on peoples' subconscious, I believe. As Marshall McLuhan said, "the medium is the message".And many read the Bible chronologically - from front to back- that's how we're accustomed to reading most books. So, had they left it out or put it in a different order, I've wondered if that may have changed people's thinking about the book.
 
Cousin - I think every Christian should try at least once reading through the Bible in chronological order. Gives a different feeling to the experience imho. There are even Chronological Bibles one can get that put the books into better order time wise.
 
It may be that when one gets their MDiv - they find that they have more questions than they began their studies with.

May. I don't know - I'm not there yet. Getting an MDiv is not for everyone. There are other theological degrees - and God's plans for most people don't include theological degrees of any kind.

Every Christian is called to share the good news of Christ Jesus - each in our own way.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top