Is Jesus or Rumour effective today?

[marco]

Many claim that Christ still has a direct influence on them today. They are perhaps influenced by John 6:37, He that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out. But he led those that followed him into torture and death; he could not save himself, and found no words to defend himself against the charges brought. He advocated tolerance and peace then lost his temper in the temple. He did not write anything that can be analysed, but leaving it to those that didn't know him he entrusted himself to rumour.


Is it Christ who has influence today, or the multi-national religions that built churches on his bones?

And is the personal Christ who whispers in the night nothing more than the sober voice of conscience and hope? Does it matter?

[Realworldjack]

[Replying to post 9 by marco]

I am interested in many things and since this is a forum that deals largely with Christ, I feel I have to express a view on that subject rather than discuss young Rimbaud's poetic achievements or Pushkin's lyricism, Wellington's commendation of the fields of Eton or Henry's final words about "monks."

Oh really? Well, do you mind me asking how much time you spend, discussing, and, or debating, "Rimbaud's poetic achievements or Pushkin's lyricism, Wellington's commendation of the fields of Eton or Henry's final words about "monks?"

The reason I ask this question is the fact that you spend an enormous amount of time on this site, and I cannot imagine that it would leave much time for much else at all.

As an example, I truly enjoy this site, and spend as much time as I can here, but I have a wife, an adult child with autism, a job, along with many other responsibilities, and therefore I find it very difficult to spend the time I would like here.

Therefore the question is, with the time you spend here on this site, is there really anything else that consumes this much of your time? Seriously, what is it that consumes most of your thought throughout the day? I would have to argue that this site would be what consumes most of your time, and thought, even when you are not on the site. Please correct me if I am in error.

I can appreciate that you want to defend the Lord

I am not under any delusion that he would need my defense. With that being the case, I am defending myself against the accusation that there would be no, facts, evidence, nor reason to believe that a resurrection may have occurred.

given his refusal to write a single word and so save us the trouble of guessing his intentions.

I am also not under the delusion that his intention was to, "save us the trouble of guessing his intentions."

Next, I am not so sure how you have come to the conclusion that it was a "refusal" on his part, as if he would be under any obligation to answer to us?

Seriously? How would Jesus, or any of the Biblical writers, owe us anything at all?

And again, he does not leave a word in writing himself, but he is the most well known figure in all the world, and consumes a good portion of your time, some 2000 years after his death.

But the question is simple: is this phenomenon we are discussing a vast rumour spread by Churchmen with a vested interest in preserving their positions? Or was the humble Jesus a god in disguise?

These are the exact question we are here debating, and I acknowledge the fact that I can not demonstrate what it is I believe concerning these things, and can only give the reasons, along with the facts, and evidence, to support what it is I do believe.

You on the other hand seem to be under the impression that the issue has been settled, however, you have failed to demonstrate your case in any way whatsoever.

That's a more interesting question than Marco's psychology surely.

However, it is a question that cannot be answered. On the other hand, "Marco" is here, and he might be able to share with us why a question that is so easily answered in his mind, continues to consume the better part of his life, when there are so many other things in life to pursue, once one has settle such an issue in one's mind?

[marco]

He made His claims - HE left it to others to explain them.

And the poor soul probably believed what he was saying, that he was the favourite of God and was wandering around in that benighted bit of the world speaking to a lost woman here and making up a fable there, like Hans Andersen. The avalanche came with cleverer folk building on his words, with Rome itself seduced into taking the cross as a sign, and countries like Spain killing for Christ.

Jesus said judge me by my results: take a look at the slaughter, the martyrdoms, the burnings, the brutality and ask whether I am a good tree.

[marco]

Seriously, what is it that consumes most of your thought throughout the day?

Heart attacks, strokes, ailing relatives, broken people .. being told I am in a fantasy world is, in a way, a blessing. If only .

And again, he does not leave a word in writing himself, but he is the most well known figure in all the world

He is well known in Christian lands. Muhammad is probably better known in Islamic lands. But making a superlative from "well known" does not mean much; people can be well known murderers, artists, thieves, soldiers. I like Thomas Gray's reflection

"Full many a gem of the purest ray serene
The dark unfathomed caves of ocean bear.
Full many a flower was born to blush unseen
And waste its sweetness on the desert air."


To answer in part your question as to why I visit, I think that if Jesus was all he said then those who believe in him will be imbued with his spirit and their voice will be his voice. I may of course be the sheep of a foreign flock, but I entertain the hope that something in a reply will alert me to a messianic truth. I am waiting. As Milton said:

They also serve who only stand and wait...... Go well.

[Realworldjack]

[Replying to post 13 by marco]

Heart attacks, strokes, ailing relatives, broken people

I am not saying that none of these things are on your mind during the day but, not even knowing you, I would have to argue that the things discussed here on this site fill up quite a bit of thought for you, and yet it does not even make your list?

being told I am in a fantasy world is, in a way, a blessing. If only .

Those are in a "fantasy world" who are under the impression that the opinion they hold, must and has to be true, when they cannot even come close to demonstrating their case, to themselves.

He is well known in Christian lands. Muhammad is probably better known in Islamic lands.

This is really beside the point of the discussion. The point is as you say, Jesus does not leave a word, and yet these ordinary folk, who according to you were under, or using some sort of deceit, cause this one who left us nothing, to become one of the most, if not the most, well known name in the history of the world, and they did so simply by living out their lives.

But making a superlative from "well known" does not mean much;

I highly doubt you, and I would be discussing this subject some 2000 years later, if it were not for the lives of the Biblical writers.

people can be well known murderers, artists, thieves, soldiers.

I highly doubt that any of them would compare to the fame, and notirity of Jesus.

I like Thomas Gray's reflection

"Full many a gem of the purest ray serene
The dark unfathomed caves of ocean bear.
Full many a flower was born to blush unseen
And waste its sweetness on the desert air."

Seems to me to be a very arrogant thought, and places the human as "the end all be all."

To answer in part your question as to why I visit, I think that if Jesus was all he said then those who believe in him will be imbued with his spirit and their voice will be his voice.

And therein lies one of the problems, which is the fact that you hold your opinion up as if it could not possibly be a false impression, and then when things do not measure up to the standard of your opinion, then it must be false.

I may of course be the sheep of a foreign flock, but I entertain the hope that something in a reply will alert me to a messianic truth.

But that kind of thing is impossible in a world in which the miraculous is impossible. This is one of the things I do not understand? If I were as convinced as you seem to be, I highly doubt I would continue to give it much thought, and being as convinced as you seem to be, I surely would not be holding out any hope.

All I can share with you is that I, along with many, many, others, have become convinced of the Gospel, based upon the facts, and evidence, and I can assure you that there are many, facts, and evidence to support such a belief, and simply responding as to how unbelievable these things are, does not erase any of the facts, and evidence in support of the case.

I am waiting.

If you are "waiting" on some sort of "messianic truth" from me, then it was never my intention to attempt to convert, or convince you of any sort of truth. Rather, what I have done is to demonstrate that it is not as simple as you make it out to be.

In other words, your argument, which is simply that the things recorded by the Biblical writers are impossible, and it would be ridiculous for anyone to believe, do not answer any of the real issues involved, and you do not seem willing to actually wrestle with the real issues.

With this being the case, it would be a waste of time attempting to convince someone who is under the impression they have it all figured out, and seems to refuse to deal with the real facts, and evidence.

Therefore, all that is left to do with such a one, is to demonstrate that their arguments simply do not hold up to the facts, and evidence involved.

As Milton said:

They also serve who only stand and wait

Well there you go! Maybe you have found your "messianic truth!"

[marco]

Those are in a "fantasy world" who are under the impression that the opinion they hold, must and has to be true, when they cannot even come close to demonstrating their case, to themselves.

In the field of mathematics I can insist that my answer is correct. In areas of debate, like philosophy or religion, I cannot assert my view is correct, for it is largely composed of doubt. BUT I think I can say with some certainty that the views of some of my opponents are incorrect, based largely on how the world is. There may be superhuman intelligences, but Yahweh isn't one of them.

they did so simply by living out their lives.

We talk about Christ NOT because nonentities "lived out their lives". Christ has been blown into stratospheric proportions because of the interest that people with a voice took in using him. The Church is not interested in healing lepers or finding some poor illiterate as a neighbour - the Church is about power, which Jesus rejected. Had the Church not adopted Christ we would not be talking about him now.

I like Thomas Gray's reflection

"Full many a gem of the purest ray serene
The dark unfathomed caves of ocean bear.
Full many a flower was born to blush unseen
And waste its sweetness on the desert air."

Seems to me to be a very arrogant thought, and places the human as "the end all be all."

The lines are a beautiful example of shedding light on the humblest. They are as good as anything Christ ventured to say through his publicists.

And therein lies one of the problems, which is the fact that you hold your opinion up as if it could not possibly be a false impression

I don't. That would be foolishly arrogant. However, when someone tells me there's a dragon flying in the sky I can entertain certainty. You seem much exercised by what you call facts: we do not dispute facts. We dispute absurdities that the facts are twisted to justify.

As Milton said:

They also serve who only stand and wait

Well there you go! Maybe you have found your "messianic truth!"

Milton did write pietistic stuff but here he was simply bemoaning his blindness, so there's no great messianic truth in his lament.

[Realworldjack]

[Replying to post 15 by marco]

BUT I think I can say with some certainty that the views of some of my opponents are incorrect, based largely on how the world is. There may be superhuman intelligences, but Yahweh isn't one of them.

Is this to "assert" that there is some sort of proof that the God proclaimed by the Biblical writers could not possibly exist? If so, could you please share this proof with us, so that I could stop believing?

We talk about Christ NOT because nonentities "lived out their lives".

Oh really? How would anyone have ever heard of Christ, if not for these, "nonentities?"

Christ has been blown into stratospheric proportions because of the interest that people with a voice took in using him.

Are you suggesting that the Biblical writers "blew Christ into stratospheric proportions because of the interest that people with a voice took in using him?" Or, are you saying this would have happened after the Biblical writers?

If you say the Biblical writers were involved in this sort of thing, then what would be the facts, and evidence that would demonstrate they were not reporting the truth? If you say it would have been those after the Biblical writers, then what would this have to do with what the Biblical writers have to report?

The Church is not interested in healing lepers or finding some poor illiterate as a neighbour - the Church is about power, which Jesus rejected.

What would any of this have to do with what is recorded in the NT?

Next, are you suggesting that there are no Churches who are, and have been involved in building hospitals, feeding the hungry, building and running schools? Surely not!

Had the Church not adopted Christ we would not be talking about him now.

My friend, the Church actually started in Jerusalem some 2000 years ago, and it was because there were those who were proclaiming a resurrection took place, and I do not see where the Church then gained any advantage in, "adopting Christ?"

The lines are a beautiful example of shedding light on the humblest. They are as good as anything Christ ventured to say through his publicists.

Opinion noted!

You seem much exercised by what you call facts: we do not dispute facts. We dispute absurdities that the facts are twisted to justify.

Exactly what facts have I twisted?

Milton did write pietistic stuff but here he was simply bemoaning his blindness, so there's no great messianic truth in his lament.

Sorry man! I thought you might have found something there to hold on to.

[William]

Marco: Does it matter?

William: It is up to personal opinion if something matters or does not matter.


Marco: Is the personal Christ who whispers in the night nothing more than the sober voice of conscience and hope?

William: Is such a voice somehow not important for an individual to listen to?
Who's voice would you have people listen to? Are your or anyone's else's words - here on this message board - a better voice to listen to?
It gets down to what the individual decides.

Marco: Is it Christ who has influence today, or the multi-national religions that built churches on his bones?

William: The individual decides. For me, multi-national religions were something the bible warns of in words attributed to Jesus. In that, many who listen to the voice of these institutions are deceived as they believe - through being told - the claim that these institutions 'speak' on behalf of 'The Christ'.


Marco: Many claim that Christ still has a direct influence on them today. They are perhaps influenced by John 6:37, He that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out. But he led those that followed him into torture and death; he could not save himself, and found no words to defend himself against the charges brought. He advocated tolerance and peace then lost his temper in the temple. He did not write anything that can be analysed, but leaving it to those that didn't know him he entrusted himself to rumour.

William: Humans generally deal harshly with any individual who seeks to move away from what the tribe dictates. It should be obvious I think - that the message given through the story is that to follow The Christ automatically is going to rub those tribal dictates the wrong way and therefore suffering the penalties for doing so is part of the agreement one has to make.
Clearly the story indicates that Jesus was not about saving himself from the penalties inflicted on those who choose to go against the evil that human society dictates.

Many understand too, that 'The Christ' is not a man, but an attitude one develops contrary to popular attitude of said evil.

[marco]

Is this to "assert" that there is some sort of proof that the God proclaimed by the Biblical writers could not possibly exist? If so, could you please share this proof with us, so that I could stop believing?

The Biblical being is corporeal, since he offers - idiotically - to show his hind quarters to Moses by flying around. I submit that this is arrant nonsense - the small details of "proof" I leave to you.

As to getting you to "stop believing", I have said many times that your belief is based on trust, on faith, not on mathematical precision. Okay you're convinced by Luke writing to the invented Theophilus (Mister God Lover). I don't think reason is going to destroy faith which, after all, can move mountains, in biblical terms.

Oh really? How would anyone have ever heard of Christ, if not for these, "nonentities?"

Communism they say started with a spark, "eeskra" in Russian. Rumours of Christ started with a few guys who were impressed; then bigger actors took over. Communism and Christianity grew in the same fashion. The natives of South America heard about Christianity from Spanish soldiers and priests. Steel, not Paul or Luke, persuaded them.

Are you suggesting that the Biblical writers "blew Christ into stratospheric proportions because of the interest that people with a voice took in using him?"

No they didn't.
I have described them as nonentities; superstitious and perhaps gullible. The spread of Christianity was due to people more powerful, who took the spark and made it into something THEY wanted.

My friend, the Church actually started in Jerusalem some 2000 years ago, and it was because there were those who were proclaiming a resurrection took place, and I do not see where the Church then gained any advantage in, "adopting Christ?"

Well the Resurrection tale probably started later. Obviously to spread the rumours a few good stories had to be used, true or false, and the Resurrection is a great attraction. Muhammad used the magnet of virgins in heaven. Same sales patter.

[ttruscott]

He made His claims - HE left it to others to explain them.

And the poor soul probably believed what he was saying, that he was the favourite of God and was wandering around in that benighted bit of the world speaking to a lost woman here and making up a fable there, like Hans Andersen. The avalanche came with cleverer folk building on his words, with Rome itself seduced into taking the cross as a sign, and countries like Spain killing for Christ.

Jesus said judge me by my results: take a look at the slaughter, the martyrdoms, the burnings, the brutality and ask whether I am a good tree.

You must prove HE made up fables or it is a straw horse that won't drink...People obviously know the difference between Mr. Anderson's fables as fable and Christ's words as truth since Mr. A. was never accorded deity.

Neither can the actions of others reflect on the truth of His words or intent - He is at war with devious and cunning liars after all. HIS fruit is the largest Church ever to exist outside of the whole total of all other religions and pagans dedicated to being against Him.

His fruit is the man born blind now able to see.

[EarthScienceguy]

[Replying to post 1 by marco]

Many claim that Christ still has a direct influence on them today. They are perhaps influenced by John 6:37, He that cometh to me I will in no wise cast out.

No that would not be the text that directly influence Christians. That text would be John 10:27-28.
"My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me: And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand."

But he led those that followed him into torture and death;

Christians have never lived for this life but for the life to come.

Matt. 19:29 "And everyone who has left houses or brothers or sisters or father or mother or wife or children or fields for the sake of My name will receive a hundredfold and will inherit eternal life."

Matt. 6:19-21 "Do not store up for yourselves treasures on earth, where moth and rust destroy, and where thieves break in and steal. But store up for yourselves treasures in heaven, where moth and rust do not destroy, and where thieves do not break in and steal. For where your treasure is, there your heart will be also."

he could not save himself, and found no words to defend himself against the charges brought.

He did not come to save himself He came as a ransom.

"For even the Son of Man came not to be served but to serve, and to give his life as a ransom for many. The next time He comes He will come in power and glory.

Mark 13:25-27
"the stars will fall from the sky, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken. Then they will see the Son of Man coming in the clouds with great power and glory. And He will send out the angels to gather His elect from the four winds, from the ends of the earth to the ends of heaven."

He advocated tolerance and peace then lost his temper in the temple.

Jesus did not advocate tolerance and peace. On many occasions He made statements like the following.

Make 14:6 "Jesus answered, I am the way, the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through Me."

John 10:9
"I am the door. If anyone enters by me, he will be saved and will go in and out and find pasture."

John 3:36
"Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life; whoever does not obey the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God remains on him."

This is the reason why Christianity is hated by many because of its exclusivity. Christians have always preached that there is only one way to heaven, believe in the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins. Jesus death, burial and resurrection was the ransom for the sin that separated man from God.

Jesus did not come to bring peace but a sword.

Matt. 10:34-36
Do not think that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I have not come to bring peace, but a sword. For I have come to set a man against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law. And a person's enemies will be those of his own household.




Mark 7:5-13
The Pharisees and the experts in Moses Teachings asked Jesus, Why dont your disciples follow the traditions taught by our ancestors? They are unclean because they dont wash their hands before they eat!

Jesus told them, Isaiah was right when he prophesied about you hypocrites in Scripture:

These people honor me with their lips,
but their hearts are far from me.
Their worship of me is pointless,
because their teachings are rules made by humans.

You abandon the commandments of God to follow human traditions. He added, You have no trouble rejecting the commandments of God in order to keep your own traditions! For example, Moses said, Honor your father and your mother and Whoever curses father or mother must be put to death. But you say, If a person tells his father or mother that whatever he might have used to help them is corban (that is, an offering to God), he no longer has to do anything for his father or mother. Because of your traditions you have destroyed the authority of Gods word. And you do many other things like that.

In fact the very reason Jesus came was to provide a way for God's anger would not burn against man because of man's sin.

John 3:36 "Whoever believes in the Son has eternal life; whoever does not obey the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God remains on him."

Romans 1:18 "For the wrath of God is revealed from heaven against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men, who by their unrighteousness suppress the truth."

Jesus had to die because He was the propitiation: Romans 3:24-25

"and are justified by his grace as a gift, through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus, whom God put forward as a propitiation by his blood, to be received by faith. This was to show God's righteousness, because in his divine forbearance he had passed over former sins."

Jesus was the scapegoat. All the sins of the world were laid on Jesus or were charged to Jesus, and God took the punish for all the world's sins.

The peace that Jesus brought was peace with God not with man.

He did not write anything that can be analysed, but leaving it to those that didn't know him he entrusted himself to rumour.

You can say that it is rumor but then why would men believe a rumor? What was it that compelled men to believe?

Quote from Bill Ehrman Atheist.

"Moreover, aspects of the Jesus story simply would not have been invented by anyone wanting to make up a new Savior. The earliest followers of Jesus declared that he was a crucified messiah. But prior to Christianity, there were no Jews at all, of any kind whatsoever, who thought that there would be a future crucified messiah. The messiah was to be a figure of grandeur and power who overthrew the enemy. Anyone who wanted to make up a messiah would make him like that. Why did the Christians not do so? Because they believed specifically that Jesus was the Messiah. And they knew full well that he was crucified. The Christians did not invent Jesus. They invented the idea that the messiah had to be crucified."

Bart Ehrman is the author of Did Jesus Exist?: The Historical Argument for Jesus of Nazareth, Bart Ehrman is an atheist. He can believe the story of Jesus right up to the point of the resurrection. But without the resurrection his view falls apart. Because there were many people who claimed to be the Messiah and were killed and the movement turned to nothing.

Acts 5: 34-39

34 But a Pharisee named Gamaliel, a teacher of the law, who was honored by all the people, stood up in the Sanhedrin and ordered that the men be put outside for a little while. 35 Then he addressed the Sanhedrin: Men of Israel, consider carefully what you intend to do to these men. 36 Some time ago Theudas appeared, claiming to be somebody, and about four hundred men rallied to him. He was killed, all his followers were dispersed, and it all came to nothing. 37 After him, Judas the Galilean appeared in the days of the census and led a band of people in revolt. He too was killed, and all his followers were scattered. 38 Therefore, in the present case I advise you: Leave these men alone! Let them go! For if their purpose or activity is of human origin, it will fail. 39 But if it is from God, you will not be able to stop these men; you will only find yourselves fighting against God.

Again in the 100's a man by the name of Bar Kokhba claimed to be the messiah and led a revolt against Rome. Up until this point Christians worshipped in the synagogue on Sat and with the Christians on Sunday. But He was killed and nothing became of this claim of Messiah. So why did people believe Jesus' claim of Messiah, when every other Messiah that lived and died there movement ended with them.

Is it Christ who has influence today, or the multi-national religions that built churches on his bones?

The only way for the Christian church to come into existence would be for Jesus to be who He said He was. Others have claimed to be the Messiah but nothing have come of their claims because they were killed and their movement came to nothing. Like Gamaliel said 2000 years ago.

"Leave these men alone! Let them go! For if their purpose or activity is of human origin, it will fail. 39 But if it is from God, you will not be able to stop these men; you will only find yourselves fighting against God.

This movement was from God because many have tried to stomp it out and all have fail. And Christianity endures.

And is the personal Christ who whispers in the night nothing more than the sober voice of conscience and hope? Does it matter?

Only those who have put there faith in Jesus Christ can answer this. To anyone else it does not matter because the only voice you will hear will be the conviction of your sin.