Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Has anyone else ever wondered if the gospels were intended to show how the story of Jesus and his followers began as one thing, but evolved into something else?
It began as a small rebellious movement against religious tradition, but after he died he "returned to the father" meaning that he was adopted back into the Old Religion in a new form. It was his destiny, it was meant to be, and nothing different could have ever had a chance of happening.
The kingdom has always belonged to the father and his own.
The father saw his rebellious son from a great distance away with great joy. He welcomed him home with open arms. Wrapping him with the royal robe. Placing a gold ring on his finger.
Has anyone else ever wondered if the gospels were intended to show how the story of Jesus and his followers began as one thing, but evolved into something else?
It began as a small rebellious movement against religious tradition, ...
...and if it hadn't been for the Emperor Theodosius, that's how it would have lived and finally died.
Has anyone else ever wondered if the gospels were intended to show how the story of Jesus and his followers began as one thing, but evolved into something else? It began as a small rebellious movement against religious tradition...
This is clearly a Christian thread, so it's unclear why this in the root/general forum.
Nevertheless, if you want to be confused, you'll reach bogus conclusions. Jesus and company where not a "rebellious movement". His life and ministry was show what had been discussed and prophesied through what became the "Old Testament". It was a fulfilling of the plans laid out for centuries. That most of the Jews didn't see it is a topic unto itself, but there was no rebellion in him against them or tradition. He was an unveiling of that which had been present all along.
If anything, it was the Jews who rebelled against the "umblemished lamb" before them. They aimed to kill Jesus, and in effect part of God (since they are of the same essence). Even after he rose, they continued to fight against his legacy and who he revealed himself to be. He came to show the future; they stayed locked in the past.
The intent of the Gospels? To explain who Jesus was, show his values, and show a model and example of daily living (interacting with others; non-judging, aiming for peace, treasuring love and forgiveness, helping the poor, etc.)
Last edited by Thoreau424; 02-22-2019 at 10:41 AM..
This is clearly a Christian thread, so it's unclear why this in the root/general forum.
Nevertheless, if you want to be confused, you'll reach bogus conclusions. Jesus and company where not a "rebellious movement". His life and ministry was show what had been discussed and prophesied through what became the "Old Testament". It was a fulfilling of the plans laid out for centuries. That most of the Jews didn't see it is a topic unto itself, but there was no rebellion in him against them or tradition. He was an unveiling of that which had been present all along.
If anything, it was the Jews who rebelled against the "umblemished lamb" before them. They aimed to kill Jesus, and in effect part of God (since they are of the same essence). Even after he rose, they continued to fight against his legacy and who he revealed himself to be. He came to show the future; they stayed locked in the past.
The intent of the Gospels? To explain who Jesus was, show his values, and show a model and example of daily living (interacting with others; non-judging, aiming for peace, treasuring love and forgiveness, helping the poor, etc.)
Well you forgot about the part where Jesus died for everybody's sins and as a side benefit Jews didn't have to burn up perfectly good eatin' critters anymore.
Ozzy, did you do any research to see what Biblical researchers think?
Unless there is a reason not to, this will probably be moved from R&S to the Christianity forum since it is solely about the Gospels.
There is a variety of research. But I believe there is an aspect of the New Testament which fits into this theory, even for many traditional believers. The same passage can have dual meanings. The Bible is multi-layered at times.
I don't care which forum it fits into. I doubt it will get much response either place anyway since so many people have viewed it without responding already.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
