Was Jesus Christ Born a Christian?

[IndigoChild5559]

The term 'Christian' refers to those who follow the teachings of Jesus, most importantly his Messianic fulfillment.
Thus, considering that the term is anachronous to Jesus' birth, we can theorize that, no, Jesus was not a 'Christian at birth.
But, more fundamentally speaking, considering that Jesus had to achieve perfection, first through studying the Scriptures, and then acting upon his convictions, he wouldn't have even been aware of his pre-eminence as a new born, or within the first few years of his life.

Jesus acquired knowledge, wisdom and understanding throughout his life, he was not endowed with omniscience, nor was he God, ever.
So, no, only when Jesus became spiritually mature did he realize his purpose on earth and his future destiny.

But you really have to nail down exactly what it means to "follow the teachings of Jesus." For example, there are people who have an appreciation for the sermon on the mount but who are not Christians. In my decades of trying to make sense of Christianity, I think it pretty much comes down to the following teaching: that Jesus is the messiah who died for your sins. If you believe that, you fall into the very diverse category of Christian. If you don't, then you are not a Christian of any sort.

 

[Zwing]

Simple poll. Anyone can respond.

Jesus, whose actual name was Yehoshua, was (at least nominally) Jewish, not Christian. Was certainly circumcised (as Jewish peasants from the Galil at that time always were), kept the Sabbath (more or less), sacrificed in the Temple (more or less), etc., etc. There is a book about him the title of which I love: “A Marginal Jew”; in many ways (including where he was born in the Galil) though he was of the tribe of Judah his life was lived on the margins of the Jewish world. He lived, died, and was buried, more or less, as a Jew and according to Jewish custom.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

Jesus, whose actual name was Yehoshua, was (at least nominally) Jewish, not Christian. Was certainly circumcised (as Jewish peasants from the Galil at that time always were), kept the Sabbath (more or less), sacrificed in the Temple (more or less), etc., etc. There is a book about him the title of which I love: “A Marginal Jew”; in many ways (including where he was born in the Galil) though he was of the tribe of Judah his life was lived on the margins of the Jewish world. He lived, died, and was buried, more or less, as a Jew and according to Jewish custom.

Since he could only claim tribe of Judah if his biological father were tribe of Judah, then Christians are faced with an uncomfortable choice. You can claim the virgin birth, or you can say that his bio dad was tribe of Judah and so so was he. but you cannot say both. What do you pick?

 

[Zwing]

Since he could only claim tribe of Judah if his biological father were tribe of Judah, then Christians are faced with an uncomfortable choice. You can claim the virgin birth, or you can say that his bio dad was tribe of Judah and so so was he. but you cannot say both. What do you pick?

Me personally? I see no reason to believe that any human being can be born without a man having inseminated a woman. The eschatological imperative which prerequires the potential of a virgin birth provides Christians with the impetus to override common sense about that. Since no Jew would believe in a virgin birth either, they would simply say that Jesus was Joseph’s son, and so a Jew (I don’t think that the rabbinical rule of determining the Jewishness of a child by the sole fact of the mother being Jewish had yet taken hold in Judaism when Jesus was born).

 

[muhammad_isa]

Me personally? I see no reason to believe that any human being can be born without a man having inseminated a woman..

Well, that is the whole point..
A believer accepts that miracles can and do occur.

 

[Colt]

Simple poll. Anyone can respond.

Christ-ian is really specific to the religion ABOUT Jesus which is very different than the religion OF Jesus. Jesus was born as the son of God incarnate, both human and divine! He was a miraculous personality. Followers of Jesus within the culture of Judaism attached their own labels onto him based on expectations.

 

[Zwing]

A believer accepts that miracles can and do occur.

Rather, you should say, “a believer irrationally accepts that miracles can and do occur.” You are right, however.

 

[muhammad_isa]

Rather, you should say, “a believer irrationally accepts that miracles can and do occur.”

It is not irrational to believe that things can happen, that would not happen normally.

 

[Zwing]

It is not irrational to believe that things can happen, that would not happen normally.

Correct, but it is irrational to believe that supernatural things can happen that would not happen normally. Do you begin to see the thrust of the thinking?

 

[pearl]

I voted no. Jesus was born, lived and died a Jew.

 

[muhammad_isa]

Correct, but it is irrational to believe that supernatural things can happen that would not happen normally..

Like life after death, you mean?
Nobody knows for sure, what might happen to them after death.

Assuming that one will not find themselves conscious ever again is just that .. an assumption.

 

[Zwing]

Like life after death, you mean?

Yes.

Nobody knows for sure, what might happen to them after death.

Right, which means that there is no reason to think that there is life or consciousness after bodily death.

 

[muhammad_isa]

Right, which means that there is no reason to think that there is life or consciousness after bodily death.

Does it?
Who's to say that we won't find ourselves conscious once more, in another body?

Only materialist thinking assumes that that is impossible, and our whole being boils
down to a "piece of meat". i.e. brain

Is consciousness due to hardware or software, one might ask?

 

[Zwing]

Who's to say that we won't find ourselves conscious once more, in another body?

Yeah, who's to say...but I have no evidence for it (and I assume niether do you). I agree that it's possible, but I'm not going to stake anything on it.

Only materialist thinking assumes that that is impossible, and our whole being boils
down to a "piece of meat". i.e. brain

The material I am sure of, the immaterial, not so much.

Is consciousness due to hardware or software, one might ask?

Humans have no analogy to "software", we are all hardware and the various effects thereof.

 

[muhammad_isa]

Humans have no analogy to "software", we are all hardware and the various effects thereof.

I don't agree. We are all individuals, and do not all store the same data.
Our "programs" are also different .. male/female for one .. and different characters another..

However, we all have a brain .. and that is not the only factor that causes difference.
Psychology is the study of "the mind", and not the brain.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

I don't agree. We are all individuals, and do not all store the same data.
Our "programs" are also different .. male/female for one .. and different characters another..

However, we all have a brain .. and that is not the only factor that causes difference.
Psychology is the study of "the mind", and not the brain.

So we have different hardware (brain wiring). I have to agree that I don't think there is anything analogous to software in the human body.

If you think psychology doesn't study the brain (and other systems in the body), you are woefully uneducated about psychology.

Try this site for a gloss on psychobiology

Psychobiology - an overview | ScienceDirect Topics

www.sciencedirect.com

Another really good source is the Lecture Collection in Human Behavioral Biology by Dr Robert Sapolsky.

https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PL848F2368C90DDC3D

Here is the introductory lecture in that series:

 

[Zwing]

Psychology is the study of "the mind", and not the brain.

With the development of cognitive science as a discipline, the “mind-brain” gap is closing; the mind is being revealed as the result of specific brain activities.

 

[IndigoChild5559]

With the development of cognitive science as a discipline, the “mind-brain” gap is closing; the mind is being revealed as the result of specific brain activities.

Absolutely. One of the things that Dr Robert Sapolsky makes a point of teaching his students is that human beings have a tendency to take things that are really on a continuum, and break it into sections, and give labels to these sections. I would point out that the various disciplines in universities, like biology, psychology, geology, etc, are artificial categories that we find helpful, but we should understand that there are a great many things that do not fall into only one of said categories. For example, take evolution, which is normally thought to be part of biology. But it intersects with plate tectonics, which is traditionally part of geology. I always found the "interdisciplinary classes" to be among the most fascinating that I took.

 

[muhammad_isa]

With the development of cognitive science as a discipline, the “mind-brain” gap is closing; the mind is being revealed as the result of specific brain activities.

You may claim anything you like .. "the gap is closing" is merely a ploy..
..as is "religion is ancient superstition" etc.

It is quite obvious that the brain has important functions.
Try running software on a faulty processor. It's useless.

 

[muhammad_isa]

..I have to agree that I don't think there is anything analogous to software in the human body.

Software is just data, but ordered in a certain way, to be meaningful when interacting with
hardware.

A thought is an abstract concept. It means more than a series of chemico-electric impulses.