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
Inannawhimsey said:
:3 (y)

I concur there is no such thing as Jesus who

After all, how can a

conceptualization, like the one you have, understand or not understand, be or not be offended by ironic humour?

That's all up to you :3

Flaunt your power.

(And how can that conceptualization 'come back'? Are you saying that it left? That the various things that are in your Jesus -- the love, the mindfulness, the sharing, the goodness -- left and it has to come back? So what's been happening in the time since your Jesus hasn't been back? Intriguing...)
Click to expand...
Yes. Well awareness of it seems to be hugely missing from large parts of our culture, from civilization. We've got the Coca Cola version instead. And the gap between the haves and the have nots growing deeper, and the war machine becoming more advanced...the world just getting so much more f'd up...and not awesomer (that's not a word) ...no the world is not more awesome now....unless one has enough money to ignore the f'dupness...or tries to shut out feeling the pain for other people (empathy)...I have guesses as to why. And so it'll rise again and return - that awareness, that empathy. Leading to positive transformation.
 
Last edited:
So when a young turk gets all in yer whatnot goin 'Jesus never existed!' or even 'My Jesus existed in this particular way -- yours is FAKE!' or some such, what she's doin is confusing the Jesus of history (what is likely?) with the Jesus of faith (what is possible?)...

Confusing facts with meaning

Science with art


flaunt your power, WCers!
 
And it is okay to mix n' match what was likely historical - because it's in the past and can never be fully known as fact- with what is possible in the future. We need our imaginations in either case.
 
Inannawhimsey said:
So when a young turk gets all in yer whatnot goin 'Jesus never existed!' or even 'My Jesus existed in this particular way -- yours is FAKE!' or some such, what she's doin is confusing the Jesus of history (what is likely?) with the Jesus of faith (what is possible?)...

Confusing facts with meaning

Science with art


flaunt your power, WCers!
Click to expand...

Just to confuse you more, here's another take on the meaning of the word "tekton" and why some think that Jesus wasn't illiterate.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/7547540/Jesus-was-son-of-an-architect-book-claims.html




I found this interesting too when he said:
"You can be a follower of Jesus without being a Christian".
 
If the historical Jesus showed up...would he think average Christians were followers? Or just groupies? Or would he walk into a pristine church were everyone's wearing their Sunday best and very well behaved- and be confused?
 
Kimmio said:
If the historical Jesus showed up...would he think average Christians were followers? Or just groupies? Or would he walk into a prescribe church were everyone's wearing their Sunday best and very well behaved- and be confused?
Click to expand...

Oh he'd probably think Christianity was something WE invented to make us feel good.
 
Kimmio said:
If the historical Jesus showed up...would he think average Christians were followers? Or just groupies? Or would he walk into a pristine church were everyone's wearing their Sunday best and very well behaved- and be confused?
Click to expand...

A look of pain as he saw what was hanging around their necks, then a sad look of understanding
and under his breath "oh for Hillel's sake"
Also, no matter who he was talking with, this

 
Last edited:
Waterfall said:
Just to confuse you more, here's another take on the meaning of the word "tekton" and why some think that Jesus wasn't illiterate.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/religion/7547540/Jesus-was-son-of-an-architect-book-claims.html




I found this interesting too when he said:
"You can be a follower of Jesus without being a Christian".
Click to expand...
What a bunch of hooey, "Dr. Adam Bradford who works as a GP" - (because medical doctors know everything, right? Even ancient Greek? :ROFLMAO: I won't bother to explain why I think that's hilarious.) No backlash? He was crucified!
 
Last edited:
Kimmio said:
What a bunch of hooey, "Dr. Adam Bradford who works as a GP" - (because medical doctors know everything, right? Even ancient Greek? :ROFLMAO: I won't bother to explain why I think that's hilarious.) No backlash? He was crucified!
Click to expand...


Geza Vermes and A.N. Wilson (both biblical scholars) amongst others, agree along these lines also. Others would disagree. I found it particularly interesting to look up the different interpretations of "Tekton" as per biblical scholarship. You may want to look into it....or not.

Of course, one has to also ask, if Jesus is the son of God/God Himself, then of course he would be literate or did becoming fully human include the possibility he could not read yet fully understand? Josephus, a first century historian, wrote in his "Against Apion" that the "law requires that they(children) be taught to read" supposedly indicating a high literacy rate among Judaism. Also, the Babylonian Talmud states that the Jews had schools in nearly everyone of their towns. Still it appears that illiteracy was very high for the lower class in the Roman Empire at large.
 
I don't know if he was illiterate or not, my objection is about the suggestion that he was a person of elite status. None of the stories, including his birth story, point to that, and he certainly didn't hang out with the elites. He hung out with who the elite would have seen as the 'riff raff '(including the tax collectors, who were low on the rungs).

I sounds like a situation of the doctor fancying himself as having elite status, even though biblical history is not his elite area of expertise- and wanting to believe the same about Jesus - we all seem to have our view on 'who was Jesus' - however, as soon as he said that Jesus didn't face backlash, that discredited his whole argument for me.
 
Last edited:
Hermann said:
Who is Jesus?

Jesus is whoever or whatever one thinks he is.
Click to expand...

And that sums up the whole problem in a nutshell. The exchange between Kimmio and Waterfall about this doctor's theory about Jesus' background makes the point nicely.

Like so many other historical, religious, and literary figures, it is hard to get to the real core of what Jesus was about because so many project their own needs, desires, and preconceptions on to him. Reformers see him as a reformer, even a radical. Church people see him as supporting their church's morality and theology, whatever church they may be part of. And so on.

In fact, while I often agree with Hermann that the mythological Jesus is really what matters, I also think that a clear, objective, non-theological account of his life as an historical figure (the Gospels are not, they are riddled with theology and imagery) would help sort some of that out.

Alas, I don't see that happening. The non-canonical Gospels are no better than the canonical in this regard. Even in the first century or two after his time, different factions in the movement that started around him had started the process of interpretation and projection.

Mercifully, a few teachings and events seem to be consistent enough across the Gospels (or at least the Synoptic Gospels) to allow some kind of common core. But that still leaves us with the problem of people seeing and interpreting even this common core in different lights.

The correct question, as Hermann's statement suggests is not "Who is Jesus?" But "Who is Jesus to you?"
 
I've eaten green eggs; "green" referring to the colour of the shell, of course. The Arcuana chicken of South America lays green-shelled eggs. We had a small flock of Arcuanas in my hippy days, back in the seventies. We fed them our kitchen compost and they laid green eggs for us.

 
Hermann said:
I've eaten green eggs; "green" referring to the colour of the shell, of course. The Arcuana chicken of South America lays green-shelled eggs. We had a small flock of Arcuanas in my hippy days, back in the seventies. We fed them our kitchen compost and they laid green eggs for us.
Click to expand...
I didn't know that. I thought the green egg thing might have something to do with St.Patty's Day. How did the green shell eggs taste Hermann?
 
Very good! But this may have been due to the fact that we fed them all of our our kitchen and garden refuse, with a little bit of grain in addition, and they had a big yard to scratch in. The taste of eggs, be they white-, brown- or green-shelled, depends on what they eat and how they are kept.
 
blue eggs mixed with brown eggs(Photo: Suzana Profeta/iStock/Getty Images)
Of the many breeds of chickens in the world, only three lay blue eggs. The Araucana, the Ameraucana and the Easter Egger. These chickens are usually bred for the purpose of selling the extraordinary and high-priced eggs. The eggs sell for a premium because of their beauty but also because these hens do not produce the volume of eggs that other chickens do.


Read more : http://www.ehow.com/info_8526222_breeds-chickens-lay-blue-eggs.html
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top