If Jesus wasn't the son of God

[martha]

If Jesus wasn't the son of God, who or what would you call him? What if anything have you learned from Him.
In my humble opinion, I believe if He wasn't the son of God, then at least he was a great teacher of the way of life .
I can find no evil in his teachings. There is only tolerance and love. I have learned through His teachings that whenever I begin to point a finger at someone who does not comply with my thoughts of how to act, I find three fingers pointing back at me. These fingers I call The Father , The Son and the Holy Spirit. Go ahead and make your hand into the shape it would take when you point a finger. It's almost the shape of a gun, oui? Now notice where the tips of your other three fingers are pointing. They are pointing at you aren't they?
That's what I mean. I see this in myself often and I am thankful that I am brought to a moment of reflection. It allows me to say to myself, "Well, haven't you also acted in much the same way at times"? Then I enter into a state of Love, tolerence and understanding.
This quote comes to mind from the great teacher, " Let those among you who are without sin, cast the first stone."
I await your replies, beloved.

Joyfully in Jesus,
Martha

 

[croak]

Jesus (as) is a Prophet sent by Allah. He is not Allah, nor is he Allah's Son.

 

[Master Vigil]

Whether or not he was the son of god is not too important to me. For I believe we are all "sons" and "daughters" of god. He may have been more holy than the rest of us, but who knows. The one thing that strikes me is how long he taught. All of the other great prophets and founders of religion taught for their entire lives. Buddha taught for like 40 years, mohammed taught his whole adult life, etc... Jesus taught for 3. His wisdom was not amassed over decades of life, it was amassed probably all at once. This I see as amazing. The only other person I can think of that taught for a shorter amount of time was Lao Tzu. But he was already really old when he wrote the Tao Te Ching. Jesus was 30, and only taught for 3 years. This intrigues me greatly.

 

[martha]

Thanks for your insight, I never thought of Jesus in this way. Three years, astounding! Let's take the best three years of our lives and reflect on what they signified. Frankly I can't find anything in my thoughts that would start a new religion or following.To teach for only three years and because of that alone, begin a new religion is truly significent. Thank you beloved.
Joyfully in Jesus,
Martha

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

This quote comes to mind from the great teacher, " Let those among you who are without sin, cast the first stone." I await your replies, beloved. Joyfully in Jesus, Martha

This is, in fact, the perfect exemplar. It comes from the story found in John 7:53-8:11, about which the scholars at NET Bible: Biblical Studies Foundation write:

This entire section, 7:53-8:11, traditionally known as the pericope adulterae, is not contained in the earliest and best mss and was almost certainly not an original part of the Gospel of John. Among modern commentators and textual critics, it is a foregone conclusion that the section is not original but represents a later addition to the text of the Gospel. B. M. Metzger summarizes: "the evidence for the non-Johannine origin of the pericope of the adulteress is overwhelming" (TCGNT 187).​

Put simply, like much of the Jesus tradition and, perhaps, like Jesus himself, the Pericope Adultera appears to be fiction.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

This I see as amazing. The only other person I can think of that taught for a shorter amount of time was Lao Tzu. But he was already really old when he wrote the Tao Te Ching. Jesus was 30, and only taught for 3 years. This intrigues me greatly.

Isn't this a bit like being amazed that Harry Potter accomplished so much at such a young age?

 

[Master Vigil]

"Isn't this a bit like being amazed that Harry Potter accomplished so much at such a young age?"

HAHAHAHA!!!!! Deut, you crack me up. Do you think Harry Potter's success has to do with its author, or the international media of the 20th and 21st century? If Rowling wrote harry potter back in jesus' time, would it have been so accomplished in such a short time? I'm amazed at how fast christianity grew back in those days. Islam is growing incredibly fast now, but at a later time than christianity. And still, mohammed taught his whole life, much longer than jesus. What an impact he made.

 

[HelpMe]

For I believe we are all "sons" and "daughters" of god.

this is what the 'bible' teaches.


the notion that the man with the greatest impact on humanity today didn't exist at all is pretty.

 

[Davidium]

"He was a man, all in all.... I shall not look upon his like again" -- William Shakespeare...

I would call him teacher, rebel, and Mystic.... Not God, Prophet, Christ, or anything else...

I would call him "Jesus"...

To require him to be divine to pay any attention to his message is rather insulting both to the man and the message.

Reason and Respect,

David Pyle

 

[HelpMe]

No serious historian would doubt the historical evidence for the existence of Jesus. On occasions some have tried but only by ignoring the overwhelming evidence that supports the existence of Jesus.

We know from historical accounts that most, if not all, of the disciples were executed for their belief in Jesus Christ. Why suffer and die in agony for something you know is non-existant?

Maraben Serapion in a letter (which can be viewed in the British Museum) wrote about the Jews who executed "their wise king".

There were many, including the enemies of Jesus, who could have gained a great deal by denying his very existence. Indeed if they had any doubt that he had existed wouldn't it have made sense for them to say this? However nobody does. The claim that Jesus did not exist has only been made in more recent years.All of the major faiths acknowledge that Jesus existed, they do not doubt it.it is obviously on the lack of faith that denies him for rather obvious reasons.

scholarly refutations of the 'jesus myth'.

This light hearted article serves as an introduction to the question that atheists never tire of asking - did Jesus really exist? We also look at why almost no reputable scholar takes the idea that Jesus never lived seriously and have a go at using the methods of the Jesus Mythologists to prove another famous figure never was.

Modern Historians on the Jesus Myth

Of course, it is quite possible that all of the professional historians (even those with no religious interest) are biased or wrong, while proponents of the "Jesus-myth" are the objective ones.

seriously, thub*.

*None of these scholars, we emphasize, is a friend of fundamentalism or evangelical Christianity. Contrary to the protestations of the "Jesus-myth" consortium, they make their statements based on evidence, not ideology.I have personally come to the conclusion that adherence to the "Jesus-myth" is not the result of careful deliberation of the evidence, but rather, is the product and province of skeptical minds in the grips of an obsession.

The argument from silence

For Some reason Many skeptics have taken to the notion, one laid to rest long ago, that Nazareth never existed as an inhabited city in the time of Jesus. They point to a website which calims that the author has excavated the site of ancient Nazareth and found it to be a mere single family farm.

here
nazareth
existed.


hf

 

[Valjean]

How are we to separate the folkore from the actual history and teachings of Jesus? People have a great capacity for embellishing stories. Never underestimate the human capacity to create something out of nothing. Wasn't it only recently that the Catholic church admitted St Patric was entirely mythological?

There are over 5,000 Greek gospels. Somehow the early church picked the 27 that most closely supported their point of view at the time, and combined them into the definitive canon of Christianity. The Nature and message of Jesus were pretty much voted on by a small special interest group and the many other opinions floating about at the time supressed.

 

[Quoth The Raven]

We know from historical accounts that most, if not all, of the disciples were executed for their belief in Jesus Christ. Why suffer and die in agony for something you know is non-existant?

Perhaps they were suffering and dying in agony for their beliefs and convictions in what was right and good. Martyrdom doesn't require a flesh and blood reason you know. People suffer and die for religious reasons all the time and its for what they believe, not because they personally knew Jesus and he was a good bloke.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

No serious historian would doubt the historical evidence ...

Tiresome and inane ad hominem.

On occasions some have tried but only by ignoring the overwhelming evidence that supports the existence of Jesus.

It will be interesting to guage your standard for overwhelming.

We know from historical accounts that most, if not all, of the disciples were executed for their belief in Jesus Christ.

Not a good start.

Maraben Serapion in a letter (which can be viewed in the British Museum) wrote about the Jews who executed "their wise king".

The Mara ben Serapion is in no way proof of historicity. No one suggests that the author had any first-hand knowledge - the letter simply reflects hearsay.

The rest of your diatribe is similarly worthless - a far cry from overwhelming. I notice, by the way, how you chose not to address the Pericope de Adultera. A convenient oversight no doubt.

 

[cardero]

If Jesus wasn't the son of God

Essentially, Jesus would still be cool.

 

[Watcher]

Essentially, Jesus would still be cool.

Of course he would!!! Come on, water into wine, how cool is that!
I think that if Jesus wasn't the son of god, then he was at the very least a very wise teacher, and possibly a prophet.

The Nature and message of Jesus were pretty much voted on by a small special interest group and the many other opinions floating about at the time supressed.

Oh oh!! This was the first thing I thought of when I started reading this thread! This drives me nuts the Jesus's divinity was voted on at a meeting. Not that I doubt Jesus wasn't a very great teacher/prophet/possible messiah....but *the watcher zips her lips* this might be better for another thread??

 

[robtex]

If Jesus wasn't the son of God, who or what would you call him? What if anything have you learned from Him.
In my humble opinion, I believe if He wasn't the son of God, then at least he was a great teacher of the way of life .
I can find no evil in his teachings. There is only tolerance and love. I have learned through His teachings that whenever I begin to point a finger at someone who does not comply with my thoughts of how to act, I find three fingers pointing back at me. These fingers I call The Father , The Son and the Holy Spirit. Go ahead and make your hand into the shape it would take when you point a finger. It's almost the shape of a gun, oui? Now notice where the tips of your other three fingers are pointing. They are pointing at you aren't they?
That's what I mean. I see this in myself often and I am thankful that I am brought to a moment of reflection. It allows me to say to myself, "Well, haven't you also acted in much the same way at times"? Then I enter into a state of Love, tolerence and understanding.
This quote comes to mind from the great teacher, " Let those among you who are without sin, cast the first stone."
I await your replies, beloved.

Joyfully in Jesus,
Martha

That is such an awsome post. I frubared you for it. I went through a time (and take full repsonsiblity for it) where I banged on Christians alot fighting the validity of Jesus, argueing against the Bible and pointing out short comings in the religion. I came to realize after time what you just said. Most the Christians I met were good people full of good things and some of them didn't know a whole lot about the religion some did. But it didnt' matter most of them did was follow the philosphy left behind and represented in Christ. The message was of love and hope sharing and giving. I realized how silly I was for fautling them for that based theories that could not counter the philsophy but could at times counter the dogma. When I arugued against the religion I made the dogma more important than the philosphy and missed the big piture of the religion. Thank you for taking the time to remind me what my Christian brothers have given me. :162:

 

[cardero]

Watcher writes: Of course he would!!! Come on, water into wine, how cool is that!

Just think what Jesus would BE able to do with my backyard lawn!!

 

[Feathers in Hair]

Just think what Jesus would BE able to do with my backyard lawn!!

Not to mention the 'walking on water' thing! And he'd be nice enough to go and retrieve beach balls that have floated out too far for kids to get them, you just know he would!

Like many of this thread, I believe that it really doesn't matter to me, personally, if Jesus was or wasn't the son of God. His teachings of loving one another, the fact that he would recognize women and children as being just as 'worthy' to hear him speak, and reminding people not to be hypocritical are enough to make him a regular at my personal altar. (Some Wiccans might try to take issue with that, but I doubt any of those here would.) Just as I see Kwan-Yin being the embodiment of female compassion (though she used to be a he... confusing story) I see Jesus as being the embodiment of male compassion.

 

[David]

If Jesus wasn't the son of God, who or what would you call him? What if anything have you learned from Him.
In my humble opinion, I believe if He wasn't the son of God, then at least he was a great teacher of the way of life .
I can find no evil in his teachings. There is only tolerance and love. I have learned through His teachings that whenever I begin to point a finger at someone who does not comply with my thoughts of how to act, I find three fingers pointing back at me. These fingers I call The Father , The Son and the Holy Spirit. Go ahead and make your hand into the shape it would take when you point a finger. It's almost the shape of a gun, oui? Now notice where the tips of your other three fingers are pointing. They are pointing at you aren't they?
That's what I mean. I see this in myself often and I am thankful that I am brought to a moment of reflection. It allows me to say to myself, "Well, haven't you also acted in much the same way at times"? Then I enter into a state of Love, tolerence and understanding.
This quote comes to mind from the great teacher, " Let those among you who are without sin, cast the first stone."
I await your replies, beloved.

Joyfully in Jesus,
Martha

Consider this information. It could be what you're looking for. http://www.freechristians.com/Robert_D_Brinsmead/the_scandal_of_joshua_ben_adam.htm

 

[HelpMe]

Tiresome and inane ad hominem.

as is your stance.of course i'm assuming that i'm allowed to my opinion as you are.

i still haven't been presented with more proof of anyone else's existence in his time or before.

what of the 'Pericope de Adultera' would you have me address?Lev.20:10/Deu.17:6-7/Exo23:1,2?

you apparently would have me address that it is not in the earliest greek texts i assume?that some call it an 'addition'?then i would also assume that you don't know much about my stance on aramaic primacy.nor would i assume that you allow me to have any faith in any matter.here's what a more learned friend of mine had to say...

As you are aware, John 7: 53-8:11 is not included in the eastern Pe****ta or the four oldest Greek manuscripts. Here's what "A Student's Guide to New Testament Textual Variants" ( http://bible.ovc.edu/tc/ ) says about the Greek version of this passage:

This passage is enclosed in double brackets in the UBS text, which means that the UBS Textual Committee felt that it was not written by John, but that it was old enough and historical enough to be considered as scripture. The passage was known to some third and fourth century writers, although it does not seem to be found in any extant Bible manuscripts until the fifth or sixth century. It possibly circulated at first in oral form and was later written down and added to the text of John or Luke.

So, here's what I think. It may well be an actual incident in the ministry of Yeshua. I believe it is. It does have lots of Hebraic elements to the story. That said, I don't think it was originally written by John (Yukhanan in Aramaic) for inclusion in his gospel.