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.
Some people believe that although Jesus was God, when he was born, he lost all memory of who he was and what he knew before, and that as he aged he came to understand who he was and recovered some memories by tapping into the spiritual realm. That would explain how he did not know some things but did know others.
Some people believe that although Jesus was God, when he was born, he lost all memory of who he was and what he knew before, and that as he aged he came to understand who he was and recovered some memories by tapping into the spiritual realm. That would explain how he did not know some things but did know others.
Could this perhaps have been a result of his "adoption" scene when he was baptized? There was a sect of early Christians - before what we now call Orthodox Christianity became the normative version - that believed that Jesus had been a normal, exceptionally pious man who was "adopted" as God's son at the Jordan River scene. Bear in mind that the nativity episodes are not present in our earliest Gospels (Mark and his sources, and others), so this would have been a perfectly workable theory - especially as many prophets in the Hebrew Bible received their Call later in life.
This view was treated as a heresy by some, but it has a lot to reccomend itself.
Your idea is certainly interesting above. Have you read any of the non-canonical works of Jesus' childhood when he is coming to grips with his divine power AND his sense of right and wrong? They are very fascinating. I feel sorry for the teacher who tried to teach Jesus his Greek ABCs heh heh!
Could this perhaps have been a result of his "adoption" scene when he was baptized? There was a sect of early Christians - before what we now call Orthodox Christianity became the normative version - that believed that Jesus had been a normal, exceptionally pious man who was "adopted" as God's son at the Jordan River scene. Bear in mind that the nativity episodes are not present in our earliest Gospels (Mark and his sources, and others), so this would have been a perfectly workable theory - especially as many prophets in the Hebrew Bible received their Call later in life.
This view was treated as a heresy by some, but it has a lot to reccomend itself.
Your idea is certainly interesting above. Have you read any of the non-canonical works of Jesus' childhood when he is coming to grips with his divine power AND his sense of right and wrong? They are very fascinating. I feel sorry for the teacher who tried to teach Jesus his Greek ABCs heh heh!
Yeah, I've read the Gospel of Thomas and a few others.
There is not that much known about the real, historical Jesus. It is very plausable he was a healer. Whether he really, personally believed diseases were the work of demons is anybody's guess. If we take a view that the bible is literally true, then yes, it would say that. If we take into account the writing styles of the era, it would seem that some of these comparisons are allegorical, or also attributed to Jesus by those who may or may not have known him. (Much of the Gospels, written well after Jesus death, were heavily influenced by Paul... who did not know Jesus when He was alive).
At anyrate... if I think the premise of the OP may be false because we do not know with certainty what Jesus really believed or actually said on these topics. At best, we have second and third hand accounts written many years after his death. (Unless, of course, we are a believer who is convicted the bible is factually accurate, and if that is the case, then we are likely to believe demons/spirituality influence disease, etc, anyway).
I remember one answer a certain poster gave to the "mustard seed" question (Eusebius) in another thread:
"Are you calling Jesus a liar?!"
In answer to that funny reply I would state that Jesus was only a liar IF he was aware of the existence of an even smaller seed, and yet chose to say what he did anyways. In all actuality, this was probably just the smallest seed that Jesus (living in the area that he did) was aware of - and one that his listeners would have known of, being mostly rural peasants. This isn't an apology for the claim that Jesus was perfect, for I'm pretty sure that when they wrote about his "perfection" that they were insinuating that his perfection was a ritual or spiritual perfection.
Perhaps too many take that to mean he was a perfect person in everything - even the arts and sciences. Well, for those people who do hold that idea - they definitely open themselves up to some questions that are not easily explained away.
I am thinking though if and it is a big IF, such a thing as an eternal, all knowing , immortal, omnipotent "god" did exist (and again I am not suggesting it does, but hypothetically) and this all knowing diety created everything and I mean everything in the earth and the universe, then would not this diety at the time already have known everything, past present and future, and that would include theories like string theory, quantum mechanics, even beyond everything we know (and do not yet know but eventually will) about theoretcila physics, ? what about human biology, biochemistry, human physiology, a field that had explanded rapidly in the past 15 years? Would not then a part of this deity as the guy Jesus was supposed to be already have had that knowledge too? It would seem not, and evidence would show that Jesus was no more intellegent than his bronze age illiterate contemporaries.
As far as the mustard seed, yes it probably was the smallest seed known, but not the smallest around, and it makes fro a great moral story, a great fable, myth, but it shows no "all knowing deity"
I would look to more intellectuals from history and Jesus would not be amongst them.
The spiritual or moral perfection may have been present, and in the slavery context this was noted, but I wonderr why Jesus was not more of a forward thinker in this issue? Probably because forward thinking in the erz either did not exist, or was repressed. Speaking out against the establishment would probably get a person imprisoned or killed. Which again makes me wonder how much of Jesus' teachings were about human rights, human empowerment and the like? Unfortunatly we may never know, as Jesus' contemporaries did not record anything and we have no valid record of what Jesus actually said or taught, outside the scattered writings of the gospel of Thimas which do not support the deity claims.
I am thinking though if and it is a big IF, such a thing as an eternal, all knowing , immortal, omnipotent "god" did exist (and again I am not suggesting it does, but hypothetically) and this all knowing diety created everything and I mean everything in the earth and the universe, then would not this diety at the time already have known everything, past present and future, and that would include theories like string theory, quantum mechanics, even beyond everything we know (and do not yet know but eventually will) about theoretcila physics, ? what about human biology, biochemistry, human physiology, a field that had explanded rapidly in the past 15 years? Would not then a part of this deity as the guy Jesus was supposed to be already have had that knowledge too? It would seem not, and evidence would show that Jesus was no more intellegent than his bronze age illiterate contemporaries.
As far as the mustard seed, yes it probably was the smallest seed known, but not the smallest around, and it makes fro a great moral story, a great fable, myth, but it shows no "all knowing deity"
I would look to more intellectuals from history and Jesus would not be amongst them.
The spiritual or moral perfection may have been present, and in the slavery context this was noted, but I wonderr why Jesus was not more of a forward thinker in this issue? Probably because forward thinking in the erz either did not exist, or was repressed. Speaking out against the establishment would probably get a person imprisoned or killed. Which again makes me wonder how much of Jesus' teachings were about human rights, human empowerment and the like? Unfortunatly we may never know, as Jesus' contemporaries did not record anything and we have no valid record of what Jesus actually said or taught, outside the scattered writings of the gospel of Thimas which do not support the deity claims.
Well, certain facets of his thinking DID get him killed, didn't they? Or it could have just been the whole formenting of a rebellion thing that the Romans charged him with. If that was never his intention - he sure picked the wrong time of year to visit Jerusalem, right when Rome was on the watch for any charismatic leader who would once again claim to be the Messiah and rile up the large amounts of people gathered there for the holiday to rebel against Rome, and once again get impaled by the Romans along with his followers, as had been done so many times in the past. But - as you say, we will probably never know due to the lack of eye-witness accounts.
As for the first part of your post - I don't really think that Jesus ever thought of himself as God, or even a part of the later concept of the Trinity, or even as THE Son of God. He may have considered himself a Messiah of sorts, but divine? No - I think his teachings on divinity (well, what we have from the Gospels) had more to do with the divinity within that led people to the Kingdom, rather than to just his own divinity. Many of his statements seem to imply that anyone could do the things he did, and that he was not as special as later "Christians" would like to believe. So soon did the religion OF Jesus turn into the religion ABOUT Jesus. The Jewish Jesus was quickly forgotten, and his commands to follow Torah thrown by the wayside by Paul, who received his epiletic "calling" by the wayside of the road.
So, since the trinitarian concept came much later - I've never bothered to attribute to Jesus divine knowledge (as you say - IF a God existed and IF he is to be expected to know everything). It is only later Christians that burdened his simple, touching teachings with such grandiose visions. See what I mean? I suppose it's fine as an intellectual exercise to help demonstrate to conservatives that their view of Jesus is in desperate need of revision, but one wonders how affective this is given their notoriously stubborn and creatively apologetic nature.
Well, certain facets of his thinking DID get him killed, didn't they? Or it could have just been the whole formenting of a rebellion thing that the Romans charged him with. If that was never his intention - he sure picked the wrong time of year to visit Jerusalem, right when Rome was on the watch for any charismatic leader who would once again claim to be the Messiah and rile up the large amounts of people gathered there for the holiday to rebel against Rome, and once again get impaled by the Romans along with his followers, as had been done so many times in the past. But - as you say, we will probably never know due to the lack of eye-witness accounts.
As for the first part of your post - I don't really think that Jesus ever thought of himself as God, or even a part of the later concept of the Trinity, or even as THE Son of God. He may have considered himself a Messiah of sorts, but divine? No - I think his teachings on divinity (well, what we have from the Gospels) had more to do with the divinity within that led people to the Kingdom, rather than to just his own divinity. Many of his statements seem to imply that anyone could do the things he did, and that he was not as special as later "Christians" would like to believe. So soon did the religion OF Jesus turn into the religion ABOUT Jesus. The Jewish Jesus was quickly forgotten, and his commands to follow Torah thrown by the wayside by Paul, who received his epiletic "calling" by the wayside of the road.
So, since the trinitarian concept came much later - I've never bothered to attribute to Jesus divine knowledge (as you say - IF a God existed and IF he is to be expected to know everything). It is only later Christians that burdened his simple, touching teachings with such grandiose visions. See what I mean? I suppose it's fine as an intellectual exercise to help demonstrate to conservatives that their view of Jesus is in desperate need of revision, but one wonders how affective this is given their notoriously stubborn and creatively apologetic nature.
Well, Jesus was NOT the only "messiah" killed by Rome, and Jesus was not the only rebel killed by Rome, and certainly not the only time that the Romans wanted to make an example to everyone else y killing what they percieved as a threat or a troublemaker.
Well, Jesus was NOT the only "messiah" killed by Rome, and Jesus was not the only rebel killed by Rome, and certainly not the only time that the Romans wanted to make an example to everyone else y killing what they percieved as a threat or a troublemaker.
I agree - I said as much above, in case you missed it or I am misreading you:
Quote:
Originally Posted by whoppers
he sure picked the wrong time of year to visit Jerusalem, right when Rome was on the watch for any charismatic leader who would once again claim to be the Messiah and rile up the large amounts of people gathered there for the holiday to rebel against Rome, and once again get impaled by the Romans along with his followers, as had been done so many times in the past.
There's a fairly good monograph on the previous Jewish "Messiahs" that had met with death prior to Jesus (and after Jesus), but for the life of me the name eludes me at the moment.
The Romans were always quick to eliminate any threats to their power, especially near holidays - as long as it didn't cause any riots. In the few cases in which rioting occured, the rioters regretted it. This picture we get from the Gospels of a weak Pilate pandering to the crowds is not historically accurate at all.
So something on another thread got me thinking............
We know of the general lack of knowledge of bronze age society compared to now.
The Iron Age had been well-established by the first century AD. In the Near East the Iron Age looks to have been established by 900 BC at the latest. China was in the Iron Age by 600 BC from what I can tell. Unless you're imagining a Jesus born in the Inca Empire he wasn't living in the Bronze Age.
1: There are demons, but besides that explaining the epidemology of mental-illness might have been too difficult and not part of his mission.
2: Hygienic codes had developed into rote methods of exclusion. Excluding people like lepers. These people didn't have microscopes. (Okay that leads to "why didn't Jesus discover the microscope?" and I suppose I can get into that if you insist)
3: I think most of the statements about obeying masters are from Paul. However in Jesus's time Wang Mang of China tried to just end the slave trade. It didn't work. To an extent though Christianity did end up discouraging the enslavement of fellow Christians, which helped lead to a great decrease of slavery compared to pagan times. (Although I'd grant other factors, like cost of overseers, might have been a greater factor)
4: I don't know enough on this one.
5: Dealt with on an episode of The Middle.
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.
