Is Jesus with us?

[marco]

One of the problems of taking a meaning from biblical texts is that when an apparent flaw turns up, we can use the trick of metaphor to explain it. Take what Christ said:

"and behold I am with you all days, even to the consummation of the world."

In what possible sense is the 1st century preacher with people today? Metaphorically, of course, in the same way that Horace is with us in his odes. Horace built a monument more lasting than bronze. If Christ is saying the same thing, however, in what format did he expect his presence to persist? He wrote nothing down, so he expected rumour and Chinese whispers to blow his message around the globe. And we have exactly what would be expected from such foolish methodology: dozens of different messages all with the claim they come from Christ. And many exaggerations and lies - as in Matthew and the ghouls.

So once again we reach the question of Christ's practicality and efficiency. Some will say: 'Look what he has achieved. Roman Catholics populate the whole globe'. Others will say, 'Catholics don't count'. And reason will say that Christ sowed division - he said he would- we have doubt and animosity. He said he was Truth; it seems he is Doubt.


Is Christ with us today, in any sense?

[JehovahsWitness]

And, returning to the OP, if his sheep hear his voice and follow him that leaves those who do not hear his voice and do not follow him. He is there for his own. The others, not so much.

If Jesus is indeed 'there for his own'.... Christ is not with the all-inclusive 'us'.

Bingo!

Christ is 100% entirely with his sheep. They can count on him in every situation, he is not "parially" committed to his own, he will never leave them! Those are the ones he is there for. The bible speaks of another group of people that he will eventally kill.

MATTHEW 12:30 - Berean Study Bible
He who is not with Me is against Me, and he who does not gather with Me scatters.

Of course its not for me to judge or say which individuals are in which group, but evidently there are groups.



JW

[marco]

Peace to you,

[Replying to post 1 by marco]

Is Christ with us today, in any sense?

The Christ (the Holy One of JAH), yes.

("Jesus", not so much, since "Jesus" is an icon that religion has created into what they want him to be. This is one reason we have so many different versions of "Jesus")


But the true Christ who said,

"... And behold, I am with you always, to the end of the age.�

Yes, He is with us, truly with us - dwelling within us by means of holy spirit that He has given us, having come to us (not leaving us as orphans), continuing to teach and discipline us, giving us His peace and other fruits of the Spirit. That being said, He was speaking to His own when He said those words "I am with you always.'

I don't see what the Jesus and the Christ differentiation is about. Presumably when his mum addressed him she called him neither Saviour nor Anointed. It is odd that this poor thing called the Holy Spirit is randomly injected into folk by Christ. In some theologies they are coequal. And surely teaching has a shelf life: there are only so many ways of saying "Be good." My own mythology used to involve an angel sitting beside me telling me what not to do. It got annoying when I was an adolescent.

"Anyone who loves me will obey my teaching. My Father will love them, and we will come to them and make our home with them.

I can see the metaphor of Jesus or God being a house martin, building a nest in a body rather than under a roof but if one is to extract a meaning that leans against practicality then it is surely that people should behave well and then they have the appearance of the ideal. I cannot see that "teaching" takes place other than that if one thinks Jesus is watching us, then we might take less to drink.

I think love is not dependent on getting something; mothers love their sons unconditionally. It is odd that God wants presents before he can demonstrate any warmth. But I agree that's how Jesus had taught himself to see deities. It would have been interesting had he been incarnated as a Roman boy rather than a Jew. He might have learned to write.

[tam]

Peace to you,

Peace to you,

[Replying to post 1 by marco]

Is Christ with us today, in any sense?

The Christ (the Holy One of JAH), yes.

("Jesus", not so much, since "Jesus" is an icon that religion has created into what they want him to be. This is one reason we have so many different versions of "Jesus")


But the true Christ who said,

"... And behold, I am with you always, to the end of the age.�

Yes, He is with us, truly with us - dwelling within us by means of holy spirit that He has given us, having come to us (not leaving us as orphans), continuing to teach and discipline us, giving us His peace and other fruits of the Spirit. That being said, He was speaking to His own when He said those words "I am with you always.'

I don't see what the Jesus and the Christ differentiation is about. Presumably when his mum addressed him she called him neither Saviour nor Anointed.

"Jesus" is like the hollywood version of a person, rather than the real person. Sure, he has some of the same sayings (such as from what is written), but then religion has gone and added to (or taken away from), as they choose, creating their own "Jesus" and then using "Jesus" to bring people to them (to mislead even the elect).

It is odd that this poor thing called the Holy Spirit is randomly injected into folk by Christ.

It's not random (nor unwelcome), and I don't know why you call holy spirit (the breath/blood/seed of JAH) poor.

In some theologies they are coequal. And surely teaching has a shelf life: there are only so many ways of saying "Be good."

I don't think 'be good' has a shelf life, lol. Nor is that the only teaching, Marco. Even so, some people do need to be reminded to act out of love on numerous occasions. Because often, it is easier not to bother - pass that homeless person by who is asking for some help, don't stay late after work since you are already SO tired, to sit with a co-worker who is struggling personally, etc.

My own mythology used to involve an angel sitting beside me telling me what not to do. It got annoying when I was an adolescent.

How is it mythology if you were hearing a voice (even if you might not have known whom to attribute that voice TO) reminding you of things you should not do? Assuming that voice spoke to keep you (and/or others) from harm?

"Anyone who loves me will obey my teaching. My Father will love them, and we will come to them and make our home with them.

I can see the metaphor of Jesus or God being a house martin, building a nest in a body rather than under a roof but if one is to extract a meaning that leans against practicality then it is surely that people should behave well and then they have the appearance of the ideal. I cannot see that "teaching" takes place other than that if one thinks Jesus is watching us, then we might take less to drink.

Why do you think Christ being with us is just about behavior? What about truth? Love? Union? Peace as Christ gives peace?

I think love is not dependent on getting something; mothers love their sons unconditionally. It is odd that God wants presents before he can demonstrate any warmth.

You would not love someone who loved your child and treated your child well?

But I agree that's how Jesus had taught himself to see deities. It would have been interesting had he been incarnated as a Roman boy rather than a Jew. He might have learned to write.

He (the Christ) did not teach Himself. He learned from His Father (in heaven). And He knew how to write, Marco. He was well-spoken, intelligent, wise, He could obviously read since He read from the scriptures... and we have at least one example of Him writing on the ground.




Peace again to you,
your servant and a slave of Christ,
tammy

[1213]

…
Do you mean it is Luke's genealogy that is the stupid one…

No, I have no good and intelligent reason to think either of them is stupid.

[marco]

…
Do you mean it is Luke's genealogy that is the stupid one…

No, I have no good and intelligent reason to think either of them is stupid.

Well 1213 we must each judge for ourselves whether a tale is true or foolish. If it is fiction we can simply enjoy it, like the Little Match Girl story. But I suspect Luke intended readers to take him seriously when he wrote....

1.God
2.Adam
3.Seth
4.Enos
5.Cainan
6.Maleleel
7.Jared
8.Enoch
9.Mathusala
10.Lamech
11.Noah
12.Shem
13.Arphaxad
14.Cainan
15.Sala
16.Heber
17.Phalec
18.Ragau
19.Saruch
20.Nachor
21.Thara
22.Abraham
23.Isaac
24.Jacob
25.Judah
26.Phares
27.Esrom
28.Aram
29.Aminadab
30.Naasson
31.Salmon
32.Boaz
33.Obed
34.Jesse
35.David
36.Nathan
37.Mattatha
38.Menan
39.Melea
40.Eliakim
41.Jonam
42.Joseph
43.Judah
44.Simeon
45.Levi
46.Matthat
47.Jorim
48.Eliezer
49.Jose
50.Er
51.Elmodam
52.Cosam
53.Addi
54.Melchi
55.Neri
56.Salathiel
57.Zorobabel
58.Rhesa
59.Joannan
60.Juda
61.Joseph
62.Semei
63.Mattathias
64.Maath
65.Nagge
66.Esli
67.Naum
68.Amos
69.Mattathias
70.Joseph
71.Jannai
72.Melchi
73.Levi
74.Matthat
75.Heli
76.Joseph
77.Jesus

We know next to zero about the nonentity Joseph and yet we can trace him back to Adam, and possibly even to the first gorilla. I call this foolish and you see in it wisdom. There's debate even at Joe's grandfather.

We must disagree then.

[marco]

"Jesus" is like the Hollywood version of a person, rather than the real person. Sure, he has some of the same sayings (such as from what is written), but then religion has gone and added to (or taken away from), as they choose, creating their own "Jesus" and then using "Jesus" to bring people to them (to mislead even the elect).

Everyone who believes in Jesus has created a persona for him. It would be hard today to imagine Jesus as anyone other than what we have in Renaissance paintings. But everyone adds and extracts something. You too will presumably have endowed Jesus with desiderata.

It's not random (nor unwelcome), and I don't know why you call holy spirit (the breath/blood/seed of JAH) poor.

Because he is ordered about and rarely gets to star. He's a shadow of Jesus, and a minor, minor deity who reminds me of lame Vulcan who was thrown from heaven by Jupiter.

How is it mythology if you were hearing a voice (even if you might not have known whom to attribute that voice TO) reminding you of things you should not do? Assuming that voice spoke to keep you (and/or others) from harm?

It is mythology in that it is a fabrication over centuries. I accept that as a child I liked the company and happily sang: "Dear angel ever at my side, how loving must thou be to leave thy home in heaven to guide a simple child like me." Yes, I was captured, especially by the appeal of "The sweetness of thy soft low voice I am too deaf to hear." But actually I wasn't really too deaf to hear - I heard it all right. There is a certain sadness in discarding our past loves.

Why do you think Christ being with us is just about behavior? What about truth? Love? Union? Peace as Christ gives peace?

I have never seen an instance of Jesus communicating TRUTH today. People talk of feeling warm, doing nice things, finding security. Truth is something else, resident in mathematical theorems. The poet Edna Millay suggested in a sonnet:
"Euclid alone has looked on beauty bare." She was just being pretentious, but there's a case for saying he looked on TRUTH. In Christ you go down zig-zag paths and come out feeling warmly important. No truth.

You would not love someone who loved your child and treated your child well?

You are playing with metaphor, Tam. I wonder what type of father looks on the torture of a son and, when asked for bread, gives stony silence.

He (the Christ) did not teach Himself. He learned from His Father (in heaven). And He knew how to write, Marco. He was well-spoken, intelligent, wise, He could obviously read since He read from the scriptures... and we have at least one example of Him writing on the ground.

Jesus scribbling in the dust is a literary device to suggest how he reacted. It is not an indication that he was composing an epic poem. The proof that Jesus could write would be a reference to what he wrote. My own view is that his head was so filled with Scriptural references that he eventually lived what he was told; he became Abraham and Adam, or bigger, and he saw himself as walking from heaven under his Father's guidance. The saddest part is when he tells Pilate he could have legions of angels any minute. Couldn't we all in our imagination?

I agree Jesus is with folk today in stories; when we hear the word Samaritan we think of the tale Jesus told. But otherwise he is with the noble dead. Go well.

[brunumb]

[Replying to post 26 by marco]

Because he [holy spirit] is ordered about and rarely gets to star. He's a shadow of Jesus, and a minor, minor deity who reminds me of lame Vulcan who was thrown from heaven by Jupiter.

He's a bit like Harpo Marx from that other famous trinity. He is always part of the act but never gets to utter a word. I suppose his big scene in which he gets to inseminate the virgin Mary makes up for a lot of that.

[tam]

Peace to you,

"Jesus" is like the Hollywood version of a person, rather than the real person. Sure, he has some of the same sayings (such as from what is written), but then religion has gone and added to (or taken away from), as they choose, creating their own "Jesus" and then using "Jesus" to bring people to them (to mislead even the elect).

Everyone who believes in Jesus has created a persona for him. It would be hard today to imagine Jesus as anyone other than what we have in Renaissance paintings. But everyone adds and extracts something. You too will presumably have endowed Jesus with desiderata.

No, because my Lord (Jaheshua) is not "Jesus".

It's not random (nor unwelcome), and I don't know why you call holy spirit (the breath/blood/seed of JAH) poor.

Because he is ordered about and rarely gets to star. He's a shadow of Jesus, and a minor, minor deity who reminds me of lame Vulcan who was thrown from heaven by Jupiter.

Ah, I see the misunderstanding. It (holy spirit which is the breath/blood/seed of JAH) is not a person at all.

I know of no one who has received holy spirit who has not welcomed this gift.

How is it mythology if you were hearing a voice (even if you might not have known whom to attribute that voice TO) reminding you of things you should not do? Assuming that voice spoke to keep you (and/or others) from harm?

It is mythology in that it is a fabrication over centuries. I accept that as a child I liked the company and happily sang: "Dear angel ever at my side, how loving must thou be to leave thy home in heaven to guide a simple child like me." Yes, I was captured, especially by the appeal of "The sweetness of thy soft low voice I am too deaf to hear." But actually I wasn't really too deaf to hear - I heard it all right. There is a certain sadness in discarding our past loves.

If you heard this voice, Marco, then how is it a fabrication?

Why do you think Christ being with us is just about behavior? What about truth? Love? Union? Peace as Christ gives peace?

I have never seen an instance of Jesus communicating TRUTH today. People talk of feeling warm, doing nice things, finding security. Truth is something else, resident in mathematical theorems.

Math is a truthful language, yes, though we do not always know how to speak it.

But truth is itself the pure language - anything that is true, Marco.

The poet Edna Millay suggested in a sonnet:
"Euclid alone has looked on beauty bare." She was just being pretentious, but there's a case for saying he looked on TRUTH.

I do not know the reference, though I imagine you are speaking about more than just appearance. Just in case you are not though, beauty (the appearance, the outside) is not TRUTH. What people consider to be beautiful changes with the times as well as personal preference; whereas truth does not change. Plus, you can have a person with a beautiful appearance, while inside that person is ugly. The Adversary (the one called Satan) has a beautiful appearance, but he is a liar and the father of lies.


My Lord does not have a beautiful exterior appearance (not as a man, and as far as I understand, not as a spirit person either). Yet He is the Truth, He speaks only truth, and He shows us His Father as His Father TRULY is.

In Christ you go down zig-zag paths and come out feeling warmly important. No truth.

That is not my experience, Marco. My Lord has revealed and taught truth to me (and not to me alone of course).

You would not love someone who loved your child and treated your child well?

You are playing with metaphor, Tam. I wonder what type of father looks on the torture of a son and, when asked for bread, gives stony silence.

I was not playing with metaphor at all. I was being totally serious.

Perhaps the point has been lost in the discussion.

He (the Christ) did not teach Himself. He learned from His Father (in heaven). And He knew how to write, Marco. He was well-spoken, intelligent, wise, He could obviously read since He read from the scriptures... and we have at least one example of Him writing on the ground.

Jesus scribbling in the dust is a literary device to suggest how he reacted. It is not an indication that he was composing an epic poem. The proof that Jesus could write would be a reference to what he wrote.

And what would be the proof that Christ could not write, as you suggested?

If He could read (and understand what was written), and was intelligent and wise - what reason do you have to suggest that He could not also write?

My own view is that his head was so filled with Scriptural references that he eventually lived what he was told; he became Abraham and Adam, or bigger, and he saw himself as walking from heaven under his Father's guidance. The saddest part is when he tells Pilate he could have legions of angels any minute. Couldn't we all in our imagination?

So have you then created your own "Jesus", based upon your personal view and desire, rather than upon truth, upon knowledge of Him?

I agree Jesus is with folk today in stories; when we hear the word Samaritan we think of the tale Jesus told. But otherwise he is with the noble dead. Go well.

But I must disagree, dear Marco. Since I said at the start:

Yes, He is with us, truly with us - dwelling within us by means of holy spirit that He has given us, having come to us (not leaving us as orphans), continuing to teach and discipline us, giving us His peace and other fruits of the Spirit. That being said, He was speaking to His own when He said those words "I am with you always.'

These are not the actions of a dead person, not even a noble dead person.

These are the actions of a living being.



Peace again to you,
your servant and a slave of Christ,
tammy

[bluegreenearth]

[Replying to post 28 by tam]

As I read through your response to Marco, it occurred to me that you routinely refer to "truth" and "knowledge" but never describe the epistemology being used to acquire what you claim is knowledge and truth. In order to evaluate the reliability of your epistemology, we need to know the underlying axioms. Would you mind disclosing that information, please? Thanks.

[tam]

Peace to you,

[Replying to post 29 by bluegreenearth]


Well, I did not know what the word epistemology meant exactly, so I looked it up. And I saw that it is derived from two greek words: episteme (translated as knowledge) and logos (the word). I found this very interesting (and kinda perfect, at least for me). The meaning behind the word 'epistemology' answers the question you asked me.



Knowledge (of the) Word.

The Word - Logos - being Christ, Himself.


My Lord (the Word/Logos) is the One who knows (and who speaks and teaches) the truth. Truth and knowledge come from Him (and He learned from His Father). Christ is the Teacher. I am just listening to and learning from Him.


Peace again to you,
your servant and a slave of Christ,
tammy