The Purpose of the Incarnate Deity

[StuartJ]

The Gospels - for me - are vague at best on the reason/s for the incarnation of the deity Yahweh in the person of the Jewish man, Jesus.

Leaving aside ALL other writings ...

What can we glean from the Gospels only as the purpose of Jesus' visitation to this planet ...?

[The Tanager]

[Replying to post 1 by StuartJ]

I think the Gospels speak to Jesus' coming as bringing us into a loving community with God and others. This would require various verses being brought in and they talk about it in different ways. Some verses after just doing a quick search on the word "came" brought these verses to my eyes:

Matt 1:23; 5:17; 9:13; 20:28
Mark 1:8; 10:45
Luke 1:33, 50, 69-75
John 1:12, 18, 29; 3:16, 36; 10:10; 16:33

[StuartJ]

[Replying to post 1 by StuartJ]

I think the Gospels speak to Jesus' coming as bringing us into a loving community with God and others. This would require various verses being brought in and they talk about it in different ways. Some verses after just doing a quick search on the word "came" brought these verses to my eyes:

Matt 1:23; 5:17; 9:13; 20:28
Mark 1:8; 10:45
Luke 1:33, 50, 69-75
John 1:12, 18, 29; 3:16, 36; 10:10; 16:33

Some of those verses don't contain the word came.

Eg: And he shall reign over the house of Jacob for ever; and of his kingdom there shall be no end. Luke 1:33

Nonetheless, this verse supports my contention that the Christian-Jewish propaganda is political in "long live our gracious queen" nature.

But ...

For even the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give His life as a ransom for many. Mark 10:45

Does appear to indicate that Jesus' civil punishment by the Roman's is being claimed as a religious human sacrifice to Yahweh by Jesus' propagandists.

Such indications are rare and nowhere clearly explained by the Gospel writers ...

As one may reasonably expect.

And we must remember that all the writings were written after the events.

However, it's what I see as the political distortions in the propaganda that lead me to consider that Jesus possibly was a genuine historical character.

If he was entirely fictional, distortion and obfuscation would not be necessary.

[The Tanager]

Some of those verses don't contain the word came.

Yes. I seem to have accidentally deleted off the "and looking at the first chapters" part.

For even the Son of Man did not come to be served, but to serve, and to give His life as a ransom for many. Mark 10:45

Does appear to indicate that Jesus' civil punishment by the Roman's is being claimed as a religious human sacrifice to Yahweh by Jesus' propagandists.

What makes you think that? Jesus has just predicted his torture, death, and resurrection (10:32-34) and James & John are thinking about their political positions (37). Jesus rebukes them for that kind of attitude and asks them to serve others instead (43-44). The author then couches what Jesus is doing, not in terms of a "human sacrifice to Yahweh," but as a way to serve humanity. In the context of what I said about the good news of Jesus' incarnation, Jesus serves us by giving his life, so that we may enter into the loving community, the kingdom of God. The early Christian movement was not about a political kingdom. This seems to be going against Christianity becoming political.

Such indications are rare and nowhere clearly explained by the Gospel writers ...

As one may reasonably expect.

I'm not sure why we should reasonably expect this or what you mean by "nowhere clearly explained."

And we must remember that all the writings were written after the events.

Okay. What is the problem with this?

[JehovahsWitness]

[Replying to post 4 by StuartJ]


All manner of interpretations can be applied to anything outside of a telephone directory. For those interested in truth the real question is can "can all manner of interpretation" be correctly applied to it?



JW

RELATED POSTS

How can we know which biblical interpretation is correct?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 438#880438

Why is the bible written in a way that is open to interpretation?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 682#844682

What is the purpose of the bible?
http://debatingchristianity.com/forum/v ... 492#800492

Further reading: A key to understanding the bible
http://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/102012416

[RedEye]

The Gospels - for me - are vague at best on the reason/s for the incarnation of the deity Yahweh in the person of the Jewish man, Jesus.

Leaving aside ALL other writings ...

What can we glean from the Gospels only as the purpose of Jesus' visitation to this planet ...?

This definition of Christianity may help:

• Christianity: The belief that a cosmic Jewish Zombie who was his own father can make you live forever if you symbolically eat his flesh and telepathically tell him you accept him as your master, so he can remove an evil force from your soul that is present in humanity because a rib-woman was convinced by a talking snake to eat from a magical tree.

Obviously Jesus was incarnated so that we could (symbolically) eat his flesh and (symbolically) drink his blood. It's pretty hard to do that if Jesus were only a concept like God. I think that's how it goes ...

[Elijah John]

[Replying to post 3 by 1213]

By what the Bible tells, Jesus is not incarnation of God.

It seems to me that the Bible(s) tell most Christians that the Jesus character IS the incarnation of the mythological Yahweh.

Where do you get that? It's only hinted at in the GoJ and in the letters of Paul. But yeah, even those questionable passages are subject to interpretation. Hence we have the JW vs Trinitarian interpretations.

The "mythological" thing aside, that is.

[William]

[Replying to post 14 by JehovahsWitness]

can "can all manner of interpretation" be correctly applied to it?

I think the problem therein is that any interpretation cannot be regarded as 'correct' as this plays into The One True Scotsman fallacy.



Incidentally this is why the JW's refer to their beliefs as being 'in the truth'. I would assume you yourself believe that you belong to the 'true' christian organization...

[William]

[Replying to post 8 by StuartJ]

Once one moves beyond the state of the mind that insists these writings are holy writ, they are a VERY interesting study.

Obviously many find them interesting study without making that move, but we are on the same page in relation to what the bible most obviously is.

My own notes;

Is The Bible Really The Word Of GOD?

[FWI]

[Replying to post 1 by StuartJ]

What can we glean from the Gospels only as the purpose of Jesus' visitation to this planet...?

NothingThe Christ wasn't the incarnation of God or Yahweh. So, the premise is flawed and has no real biblical meaning. The gospels are clear that the Son of God was born a human being, through a human being and not a manifestation of any false doctrine. This idea was introduced and accepted at the Council of Nicea in the fourth century A.D. and is the reason why "most" Jews today do not accept the Christ for who he is.

So, the visitation you imply is in error. Yet, I'm wondering: what is the real intent of this divisive question, especially coming from an atheist.

[RedEye]

[Replying to post 1 by StuartJ]

What can we glean from the Gospels only as the purpose of Jesus' visitation to this planet...?

NothingThe Christ wasn't the incarnation of God or Yahweh. So, the premise is flawed and has no real biblical meaning. The gospels are clear that the Son of God was born a human being, through a human being and not a manifestation of any false doctrine.

That's not what the author of John tells us:

• John 1
  1In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. 2 He was with God in the beginning. 3 Through him all things were made; without him nothing was made that has been made.
  |
  14 The Word became flesh and made his dwelling among us. We have seen his glory, the glory of the one and only Son, who came from the Father, full of grace and truth.