The Exclusivity of Christianity: Myth or Reality

[Shem Ben Noah]

...
One of the most commonly quoted passages from the bible to justify this view is: John 14:6

"Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me."

What's the best way of looking at this passage?...

As a complete distortion and mistranslation of what he actually said.

 

[Shem Ben Noah]

Evan's guardian angel is one theory out of several, based on which textual camp you are in. However, it is not definitive.

What makes more sense, that GOD HIMSELF physically wrestles with humans, or that he sends an angel like he did when he destroyed Sodom?

 

[Dawnofhope]

Thank you. I enjoy reading your insights. It may be hard for a Baha'i and a theist to agree on everything. Lets consider further:

Others (myself included) understand that what Jesus meant was "but by me = by my teachings."

We have the deeds and faith argument for salvation.

I would argue its both based on scripture:
Peter 2:17-18 "Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone. Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works: shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works."

Some Christians argue by Faith alone, and I understood the theologian and reformer Martin Luther emphasised this.

Some from a less monotheistic outlook may consider just deeds and Faith best dispensed with.

In other words, living according to what is written about the laws found in the OT. That is also why Jesus said in Matthew 5:17-18 "Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished."

This is really very interesting because many of the laws of the Old Testament would be considered redundant by Christians as Christ was thought to have brought a New Covenant (Jeremiah 31:31). A prophecy in Zechariah 14:4 also highlights a great separation between Judaism and the Christian teachings.

No where in the Bible do you find anything about having to accept Jesus into your heart. That is merely ceremonial. Most Christians run into the problem of having to read the Bible in their native language (English for most) and don't understand Koine Greek (NT language). They rely on translation X, and those are subject to biases of the translation teams working for publishing houses or religious organizations.

The greatest commandments of Love God and Love thy neighbour would suggest love for Jesus given His close association with God. It would be fascinating to consider how Koine Greek might change our understanding.

However, I personally do not think that their way is the only way for a variety of reasons.

I agree with this but probably for different reasons from a Deist. I would see An All-Loving and Just God sending those to hell based on a narrow and literal interpretation of John 14:6 inconsistent with God's Mercy. I would argue God has sent other Great Teachers or Manifestations as a token of His Grace.

All excellent points raised and each one worthy of further consideration and debate in this thread.

 

[Dawnofhope]

If Jesus is seen as a metaphor rather than a god then it would be much easier to understand.
The Christ is inside of us.
The second coming of Christ is an internal experience.
Salvation is a free gift to humanity.
It is our birthright.

So no matter what god-man you believe in, if he or she points to your true Self, that is your Oneness with the Source, then that is your way.

Thank you

So no literal Jesus or second coming. All metaphorical. right?

 

[Dawnofhope]

As a complete distortion and mistranslation of what he actually said.

So what did He say?

 

[wizanda]

What's the best way of looking at this passage?

The best way is to recognize in all 3 Synoptic Gospels Yeshua doesn't go around using 'I Am' about himself, and used it to refer to God....

Yeshua warned in all 3 Synoptic Gospels the whole world will be deceived by these Ego I-mee statements:

Luke 21:8 He said, "Watch out that you don't get led astray, for many will come in my name, saying, 'I am (Ego I-mee),' and, 'The time is at hand. (Eggizo)' Therefore don't follow them.

So when there are 7 specific 'I Am' statements in John, fulfilling prophecy of a written deception going globally to spread iniquity (Zechariah 3:9), personally would pay attention to it.

Is there a better way of understanding salvation?

Yes remove the gospel of John, and stick with the Synoptic Gospels, and the prophets.

Then understand that Yeshua means Salvation, through his knowledge he teaches Oneness, leading people to a righteous path.

The stuff that is made up about him, about him being the only way or believing in his death, leads in the opposite direction.

 

[Dawnofhope]

Luke 21:8 He said, "Watch out that you don't get led astray, for many will come in my name, saying, 'I am (Ego I-mee),' and, 'The time is at hand. (Eggizo)' Therefore don't follow them.

One way of viewing this verse would be in regards to the Messianic expectations of the time of Jesus, and false prophets and teachers would come. A good example is Bar Kohkba who seemed to fulfil Davidic expectations and led the Jewish people to defeat. The book of John is filled with profound spiritual insights and more challenging than the synoptic Gospels. I'm with the vast majority of Christians who accept this as an authorative text.

So when there are 7 specific 'I Am' statements in John, fulfilling prophecy of a written deception going globally to spread iniquity (Zechariah 3:9), personally would pay attention to it.

This verse is from apocalyptic type writings and is highly symbolic. The seven eyes in the stone probably represent a great prophet who brings stability (rock), is has perfect (seven) spiritual perception (eyes). Reading it in context supports this view, for example removing iniquity in one day and being with neighbours under a vine or fig tree.

 

[wizanda]

One way of viewing this verse would be in regards to the Messianic expectations of the time of Jesus

If you were talking about the 7 'I Am' statements in John, that line makes perfect sense....

As what they've done is made up what they expected the Messiah to be saying, having the seven spirits of God in Isaiah superimposed onto jesus's character, as these were first century expectations of the Messiah....

The problem with that is, Yeshua doesn't speak that way, there are no parables in John, and it is a totally different character.

being with neighbours under a vine or fig tree.

That is a reoccurring reference to the Messianic age, where there shall be world peace.

The book of John is filled with profound spiritual insights and more challenging than the synoptic Gospels.

That is such a mushy statement, John has flowery writing, that lacks real depth; tho it seems deep in a slightly Gnostic sense, yet is dark when properly understood...

As it makes that light is hated, this world is run by the devil, and we're all meant to hate being here.

On the other hand the Parables and teachings of Yeshua can be compared to Lao Tzu's and Buddha's thought, the parables, and even slight statements take vast amount of study, as they interlink in multiple places within the Tanakh.....

Which just shows you're contradicting yourself to prove a point, as even you found the 70 x 7 statement profound, and had to spend ages researching it.

Yet carry on arguing, I'm still going to try and help regardless, even if you think you're trying to win.

 

[allfoak]

So no literal Jesus or second coming. All metaphorical. right?

Right.

 

[Dawnofhope]

If you were talking about the 7 'I Am' statements in John, that line makes perfect sense....

Or "I am" may have nothing to do with the seven eyes of the stone and represent a more profound insight into the reality of Christ.

As what they've done is made up what they expected the Messiah to be saying, having the seven spirits of God in Isaiah superimposed onto jesus's character, as these were first century expectations of the Messiah....

You would hardly expect the Messiah to have a whole new seven virtues that no one had ever heard of before! Of course He will have the virtues or spiritual qualities in Isaiah.

The problem with that is, Yeshua doesn't speak that way, there are no parables in John, and it is a totally different character.

John has a different approach to story telling and has better comprehension of the mystical aspects of Jesus' teaching. I'm good with that as are most Christians.

That is a reoccurring reference to the Messianic age, where there shall be world peace.

Agreed, but it certainly isn't a reference to the book of John being false.

As it makes that light is hated, this world is run by the devil, and we're all meant to hate being here.

If you take it literally its very dark. However its all allegorical so all light once you make the effort to understand it. Learn to love paradox! It's a reflection of the Eternal Covenant of God no less.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

Some Christians belief that there is only one way to God and that is through Jesus.

This could mean only Christians make it to heaven and people of all other faiths are destined for hell.

One of the most commonly quoted passages from the bible to justify this view is: John 14:6

"Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me."

What's the best way of looking at this passage?

Is their reasonable justification for Christians' claims that only their faith can save? Is there a better way of understanding salvation?

Christian's say "faith in jesus" will save not only their faith will save.

"Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me." Only through faith in christ, one is saved. That's christian claim.

Whoever has the Son has life; whoever does not have the Son of God does not have life. 1 John 5:12

Faith saves: “Go,” said Jesus, “your faith has healed you.” Immediately he received his sight and followed Jesus along the road.
Mark 10:52 | NIV | faith healing

Without it, through jesus, there is no salvation.

Salvation means life in god through christ

Whoever has the Son has life; whoever does not have the Son of God does not have life. 1 John 5:12

Yep. The Bible says that everyone has sined (commit an action against god) and without jesus, they will be separated from god. It doesn't say "those who do not believe" will be separated from god. It's a default for not knowing christ.

As for hell, it's saved for sinners not disbelievers. I don't know where disbelievers go if they have not sined.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

"Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me."

Some people will interpret that verse in a literal sense, that only by accepting Jesus and using him as the intermediary or savior, will they get to God.

Others (myself included) understand that what Jesus meant was "but by me = by my teachings." In other words, living according to what is written about the laws found in the OT. That is also why Jesus said in Matthew 5:17-18 "Do not think that I have come to abolish the Law or the Prophets; I have not come to abolish them but to fulfill them. I tell you the truth, until heaven and earth disappear, not the smallest letter, not the least stroke of a pen, will by any means disappear from the Law until everything is accomplished."

The Law refers to the Torah, or the first five books of the Bible. The Prophets refers to the books named after the major/minor prophets of the OT (like Isaiah). Jesus is saying to live according to the Word.

No where in the Bible do you find anything about having to accept Jesus into your heart. That is merely ceremonial. Most Christians run into the problem of having to read the Bible in their native language (English for most) and don't understand Koine Greek (NT language). They rely on translation X, and those are subject to biases of the translation teams working for publishing houses or religious organizations.

Having said all of that, it is fine for Christians to believe their way is the right way, if they live a moral life and follow the Word. It does not mean that they are right, but no harm = no foul. However, I personally do not think that their way is the only way for a variety of reasons. The Cosmic Theology thread (last paragraph) in the Deism DIR goes over "why".

That would mean the biblical verses that say you can only be saved through jesus and the disciples claims and examples that they have been saved by jesus are false?

 

[Unveiled Artist]

In context he seems to be saying he is the same as the Father. Since nobody knows the Father you can only know the Father by knowing Jesus.

He is saying he is the way to the father not the same as the father. He is an intermediary not the father himself. Salvation is from the father alone and can only be obtained through jesus christ. That's not opinion. There are zillions of scripture quotes. Got to read the prepositions.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

That's not what it says. It says if you know the Son then you also know the Father. Since nobody has ever seen the Father the only way you can know the Father is by knowing the Son. Which implies that the Father and Son are the same in spirit, or in nature.

It is because when you say "also" you are saying that what jesus says is also what the father says. They share the same spirit they are not the same spirit. Like two circles sharing the same space. My mother and I sharing the same blood. My father and I sharing the same interest in art. It's a shared union between father and son. That is why no one can get to the father except through his son. If they were the same nature (same person, rather) then there would be no intermediary. Jesus would say you have to believe in me and me only to be saved. He doesn't say that. He says you have to believe in me to believe in the father. It's a joined union between father and son. Not between himself.

It doesn't invalidate they share the same spirit. It just means sharing and being of the same spirit are two different things.

Another example, jesus says that with faith you will have all things just as he. When he raised lazareth, he said it was his faith in his father not by his own doing. When a christian is baptized, they are baptized in the father, the son, and the holy spirit. So, the christian shares the same nature as christ and christ shares the same nature as his father.

 

[Kemosloby]

He is saying he is the way to the father not the same as the father. He is an intermediary not the father himself. Salvation is from the father alone and can only be obtained through jesus christ. That's not opinion. There are zillions of scripture quotes. Got to read the prepositions.

The only way to know the Father is by knowing the Son, since you cannot follow Jesus to the Father where he is going. That is the exclusivity he is talking about in that passage. Similar to this passage.

John 8:19 Then they asked him, "Where is your father?" "You do not know me or my Father," Jesus replied. "If you knew me, you would know my Father also."

 

[Unveiled Artist]

The only way to know the Father is by knowing the Son, since you cannot follow Jesus to the Father where he is going. That is the exclusivity he is talking about in that passage. Similar to this passage.

John 8:19 Then they asked him, "Where is your father?" "You do not know me or my Father," Jesus replied. "If you knew me, you would know my Father also."

Because you can only be saved through jesus christ. Jesus is the representative of his father. So if you know the representative of the father (or intermediary hence the through) you will know the father.

That's why "if you knew me, you know the father" because "I am the intermediary between you and the father, so the only way to get to the father is through me."

 

[Unveiled Artist]

For example, the prepositions give a way the relationship between father and son.

John 1:1 - In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

Jesus is an intermediary and representative. So whatever christ says it is what god says. So the Word (the message of Christ; what he sent) is god's word not christ. Christ does not claim what he says is his own. He says it is of his father. That's in scripture.

By saying jesus is god is saying god doesn't have a son.

John 1:14 - And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.

The message or Word of his father became human (a analogy that god's word became flesh) since his son shares the two spirit together hence, sharing one word/message of salvation. But they are not each other. In these passages, jesus and god are talking about the father's Word not jesus' jesus doesn't claim the Word. If he were god, he would. He never does.

John 10:30 - I and [my] Father are one.

Because the word is his father and jesus represents his father, it would make sense in this statement that they are one because they share spirits.

Isaiah 9:6 - For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.

The father said "this is my son for whom I am pleased" and jesus says that the only way to the father is through him. So the disciples have always looked to christ (unfortunately, even though christ keeps pointing to his father) as these words (like Lord King Henry) because that's how they depict him as a savior. These are titles of the relationship they have with their master with whom, through him (I think it was Peter) thought that jesus was the One who did everything, but jesus corrected him.

1 Corinthians 15:28
Verse Concepts

When all things are subjected to Him, then the Son Himself also will be subjected to the One who subjected all things to Him, so that God may be all in all.

John 14:13

"Whatever you ask in My name, that will I do, so that the Father may be glorified in the Son.

If I went to the judge (pretending I cant represent myself as a client) and said "hey I'm innocent", he'd probably laugh. If I went to my lawyer and depended on him to save me, then the judge would listen to the lawyer who vouches for my innocence.

So, I asked not to be guilty in the name of my lawyer with whom saved me from being locked in prison. He is my lord, my savior, my light, and my hope. I am grateful to him, and because he is the way to me being saved from the judge, to him I seek shelter. That's the only way the judge would listen to me is if I went through the representative of the court.

It's a simple concept. It doesn't invalidate the divinity of jesus. It's just saying that jesus says he doesn't do things of his father but his father does things through him and that is the way a christian should see it, not jesus as the father (which he kept correcting Peter for), but seeing jesus and believing in jesus as the disciples did to get to the father.

The only way to know the Father is by knowing the Son, since you cannot follow Jesus to the Father where he is going. That is the exclusivity he is talking about in that passage. Similar to this passage.

John 8:19 Then they asked him, "Where is your father?" "You do not know me or my Father," Jesus replied. "If you knew me, you would know my Father also."

 

[Kemosloby]

For example, the prepositions give a way the relationship between father and son.

John 1:1 - In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God.

Jesus is an intermediary and representative. So whatever christ says it is what god says. So the Word (the message of Christ; what he sent) is god's word not christ. Christ does not claim what he says is his own. He says it is of his father. That's in scripture.

By saying jesus is god is saying god doesn't have a son.

John 1:14 - And the Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, (and we beheld his glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father,) full of grace and truth.

The message or Word of his father became human (a analogy that god's word became flesh) since his son shares the two spirit together hence, sharing one word/message of salvation. But they are not each other. In these passages, jesus and god are talking about the father's Word not jesus' jesus doesn't claim the Word. If he were god, he would. He never does.

John 10:30 - I and [my] Father are one.

Because the word is his father and jesus represents his father, it would make sense in this statement that they are one because they share spirits.

Isaiah 9:6 - For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counsellor, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace.

The father said "this is my son for whom I am pleased" and jesus says that the only way to the father is through him. So the disciples have always looked to christ (unfortunately, even though christ keeps pointing to his father) as these words (like Lord King Henry) because that's how they depict him as a savior. These are titles of the relationship they have with their master with whom, through him (I think it was Peter) thought that jesus was the One who did everything, but jesus corrected him.

1 Corinthians 15:28
Verse Concepts

When all things are subjected to Him, then the Son Himself also will be subjected to the One who subjected all things to Him, so that God may be all in all.

John 14:13

"Whatever you ask in My name, that will I do, so that the Father may be glorified in the Son.

If I went to the judge (pretending I cant represent myself as a client) and said "hey I'm innocent", he'd probably laugh. If I went to my lawyer and depended on him to save me, then the judge would listen to the lawyer who vouches for my innocence.

So, I asked not to be guilty in the name of my lawyer with whom saved me from being locked in prison. He is my lord, my savior, my light, and my hope. I am grateful to him, and because he is the way to me being saved from the judge, to him I seek shelter. That's the only way the judge would listen to me is if I went through the representative of the court.

It's a simple concept. It doesn't invalidate the divinity of jesus. It's just saying that jesus says he doesn't do things of his father but his father does things through him and that is the way a christian should see it, not jesus as the father (which he kept correcting Peter for), but seeing jesus and believing in jesus as the disciples did to get to the father.

Alot of times the prepositions and sentence structures vary from bible to bible, because the interpreters don't always know exactly what it's saying. So putting things in the context of the conversation is at least as reliable.

 

[Unveiled Artist]

This is an interesting and maybe funny way to explain it.

The Father and Jesus Christ

The only way a Christian can get to the Father is through Jesus

Even though the two look the same and smile the same, they are not the same people.

 

[Kemosloby]

This is an interesting and maybe funny way to explain it.

The Father and Jesus Christ

The only way a Christian can get to the Father is through Jesus

Even though the two look the same and smile the same, they are not the same people.

Because Jesus has told you that he and the Father are the same you can know they are both smiley faces. How else would you know?