Is Jesus the only way to God

[Marsh]

Of course not. This teaching of exclusivity is just a means of control.

The teaching sounds exclusive because God is exclusive, Bob. That's what makes God God: being the one who created us, yeah? It's God's personality that's enshrined in the teaching of the law, the prophets, and Jesus, which makes these things inherently exclusive. I know it's the politically correct thing to say that every path is equal, but that's just not the way things are. God didn't give everyone power to bring the Israelites out of Egypt; he gave it to Moses. He didn't give everyone the power to call down fire from Heaven; he gave it to Elijah. He didn't foretell the coming of Christ through every Jewish person; just through a few that he chose to be prophets. Moses himself said that he wished that every man could be a prophet, but that's just not the way it is because God picks and chooses, and if he chose Jesus to be the way to him, then that's just the way it is. Totally not politically correct, and totally not democratic, but still true.

By the way, sorry about the presupposition about your having grown up in a Christian family, Bob; my bad. I just assumed that from a few things you said earlier...

Marsh

 

[bob x]

The teaching sounds exclusive because God is exclusive, Bob.

No, God does not exclude anyone or anything. Any such picture of "God" is just a political fantasy, to serve the egotism of one's own faction.

God didn't give everyone power to bring the Israelites out of Egypt; he gave it to Moses. He didn't give everyone the power to call down fire from Heaven; he gave it to Elijah. He didn't foretell the coming of Christ through every Jewish person; just through a few that he chose to be prophets.

I don't believe any of that, either.

 

[Marsh]

I don't believe any of that, either.

Then............... why are you posting on a Christian forum, Bob? Not that you're not welcome or anything; I just don't know what we're supposed to talk about if we don't have any common ground...

 

[wil]

Then............... why are you posting on a Christian forum, Bob? Not that you're not welcome or anything; I just don't know what we're supposed to talk about if we don't have any common ground...

There are many Christians that don't believe litterally every word in the bible. The history of Egypt is pretty well documented and while they conquered many, lost wars, enslaved plenty of folks and captured and controlled and lost plenty of land the whole biblical history somehow doesn't coincide with what we know. What we do know is they've got no record of Moses (or someone at that level leaving with a bunch of slaves) or the enslavement of Hebrews at that time or their escape (some have said revisionist history and they wouldn't record such a debacle yet other such follies have been recorded)...oh and that and they controlled the land to which Moses escaped...so...he and the tribe escaped Egypt to Egypt??

As we learn more about the archeological record and past civilizations biblical history loses its historical value. Just as the quotes of Jesus aren't quotes, but what was written.

To the Christian, this shouldn't deminish the faith, but instead accent the power of the story, the allegory, the parables and the mystery.

 

[Marsh]

There are many Christians that don't believe litterally every word in the bible. The history of Egypt is pretty well documented...
As we learn more about the archeological record and past civilizations biblical history loses its historical value. Just as the quotes of Jesus aren't quotes, but what was written.

To the Christian, this shouldn't deminish the faith, but instead accent the power of the story, the allegory, the parables and the mystery.

Fair enough, Wil. Although, I'm not sure that the records that archeology digs up should be considered immutible, absolute truth. Think about it: If you were an Egyptian historian, would you want to include the embarassing details of how Moses defeated your pharaoh, who is actually the incarnation of god? If we are going to assume that the Bible is historically inaccurate, I think we also need to be equally critical of any other information source.

I think it's a pretty big jump to assume that the quotations made in the gospel of John are fabricated, which is what I'm reading into your post. Assuming that the original author is John, his writing is significant because he spent more time with Jesus during his ministry than anyone else, making him the best (not perfect, but best) source. Though the quotations wouldn't be exact quotations, the spirit of what Jesus said (the parables for example) would be fairly close, and in particular there would be some phrases that stick more than others, and I would say "I am the way, the truth, and the life," would be one of those phrases.

John would also have no propaganda motive behind his writings, I don't think, because he lived before the institutional churches.

 

[wil]

Evidently the records do show many defeats, losses, slaves etc. I'm not the archeologist, I just read. Info is now coming from Israeli Uni's I'm thinking they have as much of a dog in the fight as we do.

I believe that original eyewitness authorship of any of the Gospels is more in dispute than considered certain. Which means it is all stories, word of mouth, second/third hand information with all they hyperbole it takes to keep the story interesting and passed on.

Even if it happened to have been eyewitness accounts decades after the fact. Courts in countries world wide know how unreliable eyewitness accounts are, our memory can't differentiate from what happenned and what we think happenned. Fortuneately the masses hold great worth on eyewitness accounts, hence are reason to request a jury which will be swayed rather than a judge who knows better.

 

[bob x]

Fair enough, Wil. Although, I'm not sure that the records that archeology digs up should be considered immutible, absolute truth.

"Archaeology" includes a lot more than "records". We know a great deal about various groups that have been through the Sinai through what they have left behind, because the Sinai has been extensively searched, looking for traces left behind by that huge Exodus we are told about: which left not one single solitary trace, anywhere, as far as we can find. Either it never happened, or else it was a far smaller group than was portrayed.

Think about it: If you were an Egyptian historian, would you want to include the embarassing details of how Moses defeated your pharaoh, who is actually the incarnation of god?

We know about every other disaster that happened to Egypt because the Egyptians recorded it.

Assuming that the original author is John...

Why would anyone assume such a thing?

John would also have no propaganda motive behind his writings, I don't think, because he lived before the institutional churches.

The author of the book, however, lives after the institutionalization of the church.

 

[winner08]

'The Way' describes the westward path to Eden as well as the westward path through the temple to the Holy of Holies. Both of these represent living right! Both paths go towards Life, either the Tree of Life or the Ten Commandments. Walking in the Way is like walking Westward through the temple. "Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you?"(I Corinthians 3:16)

Any person can say "I am the Way the Truth and the Life" if they truly represent these things. There are many more verses that mention and explain the Way, Truth and the Life with two important ones below. One describes a covenant with Levi. By saying "I am the Way the Truth and the Life, no man comes unto the Father but by me" Jesus is teaching that we are to become the way truth and life, following his and Levi's examples. Its a figure of speech.

Any person can say I am the way the truth and the life if they truly represent these things. What? Yea anybody can say these word anybody. But only Jesus Christ the Son of God Is The only way the only truth and the only life. If one wants to be in the kingdom of God. Is this the christain part of this site? If so you are truly disrespecting The Son of God Who by the way died for Your sins and is the only way you are even able to be in Gods kingdom. Anybody, No Just Jesus Christ.

 

[Thomas]

Why would anyone assume such a thing?

Because logically, John is the best candidate?

Or put another way, no other candidate fits the bill, whereas nothing about the Gospel we have precludes the John of tradition, whilst everything about John suggests it was him.

The author of the book, however, lives after the institutionalization of the church.

Not at all. The final redaction of the Gospel of John predates the Johannine Epistles, issued — again according to tradition — from the church at Ephesus.

Most scholars recognise the existence of a Johannine Community as yet distinct and separate from other Christian communities. They certainly do not talk of an 'institutionalised' church at this early date, and I don't think you can say anything like that, with the implication it carries.

Thomas

 

[Marsh]

"Archaeology" includes a lot more than "records". We know a great deal about various groups that have been through the Sinai through what they have left behind, because the Sinai has been extensively searched, looking for traces left behind by that huge Exodus we are told about: which left not one single solitary trace, anywhere, as far as we can find. Either it never happened, or else it was a far smaller group than was portrayed.

So.... archeologists have been looking for evidence, in the desert, of a people who wandered around like nomads without ever establishing a permanent settlement, which took place several thousand years ago.... And we should be surprised when such an undertaking turns nothing up?

Not finding something is not proof that that something didn't happen, Bob. By the way, I studied archeology in my first year of university; it's hard enough to find permanent settlements, let alone the remnants of a nomadic one.

 

[Thomas]

Quite right —

Personally, I am surprised at anyone who declares something impossible because science says. Science, especially archaeology, has been obliged to revise its beliefs and its assertions so many times as new developments occur, that I don't think it can any longer be used as a foundation of an absolute argument.

Not finding something is not proof that that something didn't happen

I am also reminded of how many years teams dug on the site of one of the greatest finds in Egypt ... but always a few feet from where the 'gold' lay ...

I am also reminded of how many times science has said such-and-such is not possible, and then next year discovered that actually ... it is.

I think for a long time scientists argues the impossibility of the Pentateuch (or some such) being written at a certain time in history, as writing had not developed by then ... then they found evidence of a written language that predates Abraham ...

When it comes to matters of faith, and belief in science is a faith, religion actually has a safer track record than science!

Thomas

 

[wil]

Quite right —

Personally, I am surprised at anyone who declares something impossible because science says. Science, especially archaeology, has been obliged to revise its beliefs and its assertions so many times as new developments occur, that I don't think it can any longer be used as a foundation of an absolute argument.



I am also reminded of how many years teams dug on the site of one of the greatest finds in Egypt ... but always a few feet from where the 'gold' lay ...

Must be why it took centuries for the church to take books off the do not read list? Waiting for it to be proven that the earth revolved around the sun. Course they could reverse that.

Despite the fact that we have no other record of the exodus other than the bible, the other little thing remains that the land they went in to was still Egypt, ie they never got away according to the book.

Somewhere along the line we have to start admitting and not try to be apologists for all this stuff. Otherwise we'll continue to see folks leaving the church in droves.

 

[Thomas]

Hi Wil —

My problem is, it seems to me once you start explaining it away ... you end up explaining it all away ... and there's nothing left.

And the explaining it away is just a matter of opinion, in itself.

Somewhere along the line we have to start admitting and not try to be apologists for all this stuff.

And somewhere we have to start admitting that our rejection of it is founded on opinion and presupposition and precious little else ... there's a huge amount of serious and heavyweight scholarship in favour of it ... day by day the Jesus Seminar-type approach of reductionism and knee-jerk skepticism is being marginalised and dismissed by serious scholars. It's very, very far from a done deal. It's all founded on an inability to believe, not on hard evidence.

Otherwise we'll continue to see folks leaving the church in droves.

I think the opposite ... once the 'reductionists' have finished reducing it all to nothing ... what's left worth coming to church for?

Thomas

 

[wil]

'sombrero' galaxy ... the Man Upstairs must have had a quiet moment with nothing to do ...

guess this sort of helps define my issue.

Haven't we got over 'the Man'?

Do we believe there is an upstairs?

Or that 'He' was playing legos?

This is what leads many away...imo

My problem is, it seems to me once you start explaining it away ... you end up explaining it all away ... and there's nothing left.

Oh there is tons left, that is the glory of it.

Knowing it is a story that folks used to try to explain creation or their divine inspiration. Knowing how our words are so lacking in regards to explaining the unknown. Accepting that mistakes were made, that it all isn't historical fact doesn't detract, it is honesty, and not pomp and circumstance and believe it without proof, do as I say not as I do claptrap.

The bible is an amazing book, and amazing collection of books. Has great value, but defending every jot and tittle is a joke. Exploring ones faith and finding the nature behind the stories and using this in your own life circumstances today is incredible. How can we deminish that?

But spending forever trying to part rivers and explain the seperation of waters above and below and great floods and the nuance of turning water into wine or feeding 5,000... it is the story and what it can do for our world that is the miracle.

We aren't explaining it away. We just need to quit defending the undefensible...it reminds me of the contortions that Nixon's secretary went through to accidently erase the tapes (OF reference).

 

[Dream]

Is this the christain part of this site? If so you are truly disrespecting The Son of God Who by the way died for Your sins and is the only way you are even able to be in Gods kingdom.

No doubt I deserve that comment, however I'd like to point out that respect is an inward thing. Biblically, out of "reverence for Christ" I am "subject to you," because it is "Christ in you" that is the "hope of glory." You warned me out of love, but do not worry so much about me, since "whosoever speaketh a word against the Son of man, it shall be forgiven him." Since you are Christian, "Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you?" In what way, then, are you not the Way, the Truth, and the Life? Glorify God with those in Matthew 9:6, forgiving me of my uncleanness, my honest mistake.

How can you assure me, however, that I am mistaken? By virtue of the fact that we all are. We all see through "a glass darkly," "If any man offend not in word, the same is a perfect man." By 'Son of Man' the gospels refer to all those who receive the Son, because those whom God foreknew "he also predestined to be conformed to the image of his Son, in order that he might be the first-born among many brethren." It is just a perspective you've never considered: that being conformed to the image of the Son, makes you part of the Son of Man. Don't freak out, and my being wrong about something isn't the end of the world. In fact, "if any man think that he knoweth any thing, he knoweth nothing yet as he ought to know." Moreover, to suggest that our knowledge is perfected would prove we were self deceived (1Joh1:8), so lets stop thinking we can have our ducks in a row.



Verses in the order referenced:

1. Ephesians 5:21 subject to each other to reverence Christ
2. Colossians 1:27 this mystery, which is Christ in you, the hope of glory
3. Matthew 12:32 against the son of man...it shall be forgiven him
4. I Corinthians 6:17 your body is the templeof the Holy Ghost
5. Matthew 9:6, Luke 5:24-26 they glorified God for giving men power to 'forgive sins', that is, the 'Son of man', and it was news to them.
   *******Second Paragraph
6. *******
   
7. I Corinthians 13:12 we know only in part, only see as through dark glass
8. James 3:1-2 ...Be not many masters...if any man offend not in word...
9. Mark 14:62, Dan 7:13 Son of Man, clouds of heaven
10. Romans 8:29 conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren
11. I Corinthians 8:2 if any man think that he knoweth any thing, he knoweth nothing yet as he ought
12. I John 1:8 If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.

 

[Marsh]

Hi Wil —

My problem is, it seems to me once you start explaining it away ... you end up explaining it all away ... and there's nothing left.

Jesus stands at the door and knocks.

Some people answer the door.

Other people hesitate, and instead form a committee to discuss the issue. Some people think it may be Jesus but are not sure. Other people think that it isn't Jesus at all; that it's somebody else. After enough debating a few people will suggest that the knocking isn't actually knocking but actually enthusiastic tapping, thus it could not be Jesus knocking at the door. Others begin to question the existence of the door itself (even though it's right there), asserting that we've outgrown the concept of doors and that it's time to move on. By this point there'll be so much noise inside that it'll be too loud to actually hear the knocking, which will prompt others within the group to say there's no evidence that knocking has happened. They may also call up their friends and ask if there is anyone knocking at their door, and when their friends report back that there isn't, they will use that as evidence that it is quite unlikely that anyone has or is knocking at the door. Others will busy themselves by taking a scientific approach, and try to build a device that can differentiate between sounds in order to analyze the pitch of the tapping coming from the door so that it might be determined whether or not the enthusiastic tapping is indeed a knocking...

Meanwhile, Jesus is still knocking at the door.

It's kinda funny, Wil, how you claim that the Bible is an amazing book, which to me is what truly sounds apologetic. What Thomas says is right: If you keep reducing the Bible, you eventually arrive at questioning whether Jesus is actually real or not, which you'll never be able to prove, and since you can't prove his existence you won't be able to believe in him, either.

The Bible is a book that can only be understood in terms of faith, but you won't believe it because it has not been proven by science which, you assume, is always correct. Church leaders believed that the Earth was the centre of the universe; the Bible said no such thing. Scientists once believed that the Earth was flat. If you're waiting around for God (or science) to put his stamp of approval on the Bible before you will believe what it has to say, I think you're missing the point. Jesus said, "Blessed are they who have not seen, but believe." He also railed against everyone who wouldn't believe in him until he gave them a sign.

Have you actually read the Bible, by the way? I mean, have you seriously read the entire thing? Most people who criticize it have not, but have just jumped on the Bible-bashing bandwagon.

Our belief in Jesus Christ and what the Bible teaches about him is a matter of faith, and those who do not share this faith will never understand it.

 

[wil]

If you keep reducing the Bible, you eventually arrive at questioning whether Jesus is actually real or not, which you'll never be able to prove, and since you can't prove his existence you won't be able to believe in him, either.

I believe Jesus to be real despite whether he existed or not

The Bible is a book that can only be understood in terms of faith, but you won't believe it because it has not been proven by science which, you assume, is always correct.

No, I do not assume science is always correct. No need to put words in my mouth, my foot is often already there. I do believe science corrects itself over time as its understandings grow or change, I believe it a shame the bible doesn't do the same (it has to some extent, but not to the extent required for it to continue growth in belief)

Church leaders believed that the Earth was the centre of the universe; the Bible said no such thing. Scientists once believed that the Earth was flat.

Joshua stopped the Sun, he didn't stop the earth as argued by church leaders you are correct based on the bible and the sun rising, setting as G!d put it in motion across the sky. Oh and yes, the bible pretty much has the flat earth thing, Science gave that up 4th century BCE, the Christian world held on till less than a thousand years ago.

If you're waiting around for God (or science) to put his stamp of approval on the Bible before you will believe what it has to say, I think you're missing the point. Jesus said, "Blessed are they who have not seen, but believe." He also railed against everyone who wouldn't believe in him until he gave them a sign.

Have you actually read the Bible, by the way? I mean, have you seriously read the entire thing? Most people who criticize it have not, but have just jumped on the Bible-bashing bandwagon.

I am not on any bible bashing bandwagon, read it a few times and continue to read. Of course I don't believe that to be an exact quote of what Jesus said but a proximation of what the author heard Jesus to have said.

Our belief in Jesus Christ and what the Bible teaches about him is a matter of faith, and those who do not share this faith will never understand it.

 

[Faithfulservant]

The authority on which I speak regarding all my beliefs is based on the bible. If someone says that they dont except that as a basis for any factual evidence.. I cannot have a reasonable discussion with them. It would be completely one-sided.

If the bible says that Jesus died on the cross and that He rose from the dead and is alive with a new body... That is fact to me and needs no other interpretation or supporting evidence. If you go to the Islam forum there is a discussion on this on the End Times thread started by c0de... and the Quran says that it did not happen.. I would hold that the Quran is false because it contradicts the bible so I will not join that discussion because I cannot prove to them the Quran is false and they cannot prove to me that the Bible is... that is where faith plays part in belief.

The Bible says that Jesus is the only way to God. Many times and in many ways. So one either believes what the bible says or they dont.

We cannot believe apart from the Holy Spirit of God. He is the one that convicts us of the truth of this... that Jesus is the only way....

And the measure of faith God gives all believers is in that very truth that Jesus is the only way to God.

 

[seattlegal]

Matthew 25:31-46

31 “When the Son of Man comes in His glory, and all the holy[c] angels with Him, then He will sit on the throne of His glory. 32 All the nations will be gathered before Him, and He will separate them one from another, as a shepherd divides his sheep from the goats. 33 And He will set the sheep on His right hand, but the goats on the left. 34 Then the King will say to those on His right hand, ‘Come, you blessed of My Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for you from the foundation of the world: 35 for I was hungry and you gave Me food; I was thirsty and you gave Me drink; I was a stranger and you took Me in; 36 I was naked and you clothed Me; I was sick and you visited Me; I was in prison and you came to Me.’
37 “Then the righteous will answer Him, saying, ‘Lord, when did we see You hungry and feed You, or thirsty and give You drink? 38 When did we see You a stranger and take You in, or naked and clothe You? 39 Or when did we see You sick, or in prison, and come to You?’ 40 And the King will answer and say to them, ‘Assuredly, I say to you, inasmuch as you did it to one of the least of these My brethren, you did it to Me.’
41 “Then He will also say to those on the left hand, ‘Depart from Me, you cursed, into the everlasting fire prepared for the devil and his angels: 42 for I was hungry and you gave Me no food; I was thirsty and you gave Me no drink; 43 I was a stranger and you did not take Me in, naked and you did not clothe Me, sick and in prison and you did not visit Me.’
44 “Then they also will answer Him, saying, ‘Lord, when did we see You hungry or thirsty or a stranger or naked or sick or in prison, and did not minister to You?’ 45 Then He will answer them, saying, ‘Assuredly, I say to you, inasmuch as you did not do it to one of the least of these, you did not do it to Me.’ 46 And these will go away into everlasting punishment, but the righteous into eternal life.”​

Notice both the righteous and the unrighteous said, "When did we see You?" Some righteous ones may not know Jesus, but Jesus knows them...

 

[Faithfulservant]

Notice both the righteous and the unrighteous said, "When did we see You?" Some righteous ones may not know Jesus, but Jesus knows them...​

​

To support what Seattlegal quoted from Matthew in red and the topic of this thread in bold black.
John 10




7 Then Jesus said to them again, “Most assuredly, I say to you, I am the door of the sheep. 8 All who ever came before Me are thieves and robbers, but the sheep did not hear them. 9 I am the door. If anyone enters by Me, he will be saved, and will go in and out and find pasture. 10 The thief does not come except to steal, and to kill, and to destroy. I have come that they may have life, and that they may have it more abundantly.
11 “I am the good shepherd. The good shepherd gives His life for the sheep. 12 But a hireling, he who is not the shepherd, one who does not own the sheep, sees the wolf coming and leaves the sheep and flees; and the wolf catches the sheep and scatters them. 13 The hireling flees because he is a hireling and does not care about the sheep. 14 I am the good shepherd; and I know My sheep, and am known by My own. 15 As the Father knows Me, even so I know the Father; and I lay down My life for the sheep. 16 And other sheep I have which are not of this fold; them also I must bring, and they will hear My voice; and there will be one flock and one shepherd.
17 “Therefore My Father loves Me, because I lay down My life that I may take it again. 18 No one takes it from Me, but I lay it down of Myself. I have power to lay it down, and I have power to take it again. This command I have received from My Father.”
19 Therefore there was a division again among the Jews because of these sayings. 20 And many of them said, “He has a demon and is mad. Why do you listen to Him?”
21 Others said, “These are not the words of one who has a demon. Can a demon open the eyes of the blind?”
The Shepherd Knows His Sheep


22 Now it was the Feast of Dedication in Jerusalem, and it was winter. 23 And Jesus walked in the temple, in Solomon’s porch. 24 Then the Jews surrounded Him and said to Him, “How long do You keep us in doubt? If You are the Christ, tell us plainly.”
25 Jesus answered them, “I told you, and you do not believe. The works that I do in My Father’s name, they bear witness of Me. 26 But you do not believe, because you are not of My sheep, as I said to you. 27 My sheep hear My voice, and I know them, and they follow Me. 28 And I give them eternal life, and they shall never perish; neither shall anyone snatch them out of My hand. 29 My Father, who has given them to Me, is greater than all; and no one is able to snatch them out of My Father’s hand. 30 I and My Father are one.”