Jesus Christ, what's the real story?

[inhumility]

I have given my arguments in my post # 52 on the thread whereby we explored the possibility if Jesus had anywhere specifically declared in Bible that he was literal God or Son of God and in that connection we referred to Exodus 3:13-18 'I Will Be Who I Will Be,’ 'I Will Be’ sent me to you.', and we observed that instead of the above words YHVH has been mentioned there as eternal name of God , we also looked into "I am who am" from John 8:58 "I am", we also observed that John 7 mentions about Jesus ‘this man is the Prophet the Christ’ and from John 9

"He is a prophet." And we deduced from Jesus sayings that in a sense every believer who speaks truth is son of God. This much has been from Old Testament or Torah and from New Testament.
Now, I give hereunder some relevant verses of Quran, also an important source of Abrahamic Religions for the incidence when Moses met God on the mountain which would be of interest to the members in my opinion.

Moses’ Dialogue with God on Mountain as per Quran​

Chapter 20 Ta Ha
[20:1] In the name of Allah, the Gracious, the Merciful. [20:2] Ta Ha [20:3] We have not sent down the Qur'an to thee that thou shouldst be distressed; [20:4] But as a reminder to him who fears God; [20:5] And a revelation from Him Who created the earth and the high heavens. [20:6] He is the Gracious God Who has settled Himself firmly on the throne. [20:7] To Him belongs whatsoever is in the heavens and whatsoever is in the earth, and whatsoever is between them, and whatsoever is beneath the moist sub-soil. [20:8] And if thou speakest aloud, He hears it and also if thou speakest in a low voice, For He knows the secret thoughts of man and what is yet more hidden [20:9] Allah - there is no god but He. His are the most beautiful names. [20:10] And has the story of Moses come to thee? [20:11] When he saw a fire, and he said to his family, 'Tarry ye, I perceive a fire; perhaps I may bring you a brand therefrom or find guidance at the fire. [20:12] And when he came to it, he was called by a voice, 'O Moses, [20:13] 'Verily, I am thy Lord. So take off thy shoes; for thou art in the sacred Valley of Tuwa; [20:14] And I Myself have chosen thee; so hearken to what is revealed to thee; [20:15] 'Verily , I am Allah; there is no god but I, so worship ME alone and observe Prayer for my remembrance; [20:16] Surely, the Hour is coming and I am going to manifest it, that every soul may be recompensed for its labours; [20:17] 'So let not him, who believes not therein and follows his own low desires, turn thee away therefrom, lest thou perish;” Unquote
Now I give hereunder some verses of Quran on the:

Status of Jesus vis-à-vis God​

The Holy Quran : Chapter 4: Al-Nisa'
[4:172] O People of the Book! exceed not the limits in your religion, and say not of Allah anything but the truth. Verily, the Messiah, Jesus, son of Mary, was only a Messenger of Allah, and a fulfilment of His word which He has sent down to Mary, and a mercy from Him. So believe in Allah and His Messengers, and say not, 'They are three.' Desist, it will be better for you. Verily, Allah is the only One God. Holy is He, far above having a son. To Him belongs whatever is in the heavens and whatever is in the earth. And sufficient is Allah as a guardian. [4:173] Surely, the Messiah disdains not to be a servant of Allah, nor do the angels who are near to Him, and whoso disdains to worship Him and is proud, He will gather them all to Himself. 4:174] Then as for those who believe and do good works, He will give them their rewards in full and will give them more out of His grace; but as for those who disdain and are proud, He will punish them with a painful punishment. And they shall find for themselves beside Allah no friend, nor helper. [4:175] O ye people, manifest proof has indeed come to you from your Lord, and We have sent down to you a clear Light. [4:176] Then, as for those who believe in Allah and hold fast to Him, He will surely admit them to His mercy and grace and will guide them along a straight path leading to Himself.” Unquote
Thanks

 

[wil]

Lots to contemplate, but my favorite quote

don't take everything you read by anyone as Gospel truth.

 

[Aupmanyav]

[/B]O ye people, manifest proof has indeed come to you from your Lord, and We have sent down to you a clear Light.

Now that you have resurrected the topic, I may mention that the proof mentioned is not enough for modern times, just what two or three people claim. Indeed, it begs faith. Why does not God or Allah write on the sky? Is he not omnipotent?

 

[wil]

Not a being, not an anthropomophic being...no hand to write with...

G!d is. Simply is....and we live and breathe and have our being within this realm...

Just as gravity...

 

[Thomas]

Why does not God or Allah write on the sky? Is he not omnipotent?

Yes He is ... but if He did that, He would take away the last and only dignity we have.

If there were an irrefutable proof of God, then man would have no choice, would he, and freedom, as a concept, would cease to be.

 

[iBrian]

The sky, the clouds, the earth, ourselves, are all part of God. God is indeed therefore written in the sky, but we are blind to the signature. God is not a vague philosophical concept - God is all, and more.

But if the words of men give you comfort, than the sight of God, then let men read but let their tongues be stilled for they have not yet seen Truth.

 

[A Cup Of Tea]

Brian, I have never seen you post such a spiritual message. You should come more often so that us new guys get to know you better.

 

[Thomas]

The sky, the clouds, the earth, ourselves, are all part of God...

Yes, nice post, Brian —
Indeed, as we say, we have two books, the Book of Nature, and the Book of Revelation.

Thomas

 

[iBrian]

Ah, but to look upon nature is a revelation itself. For are you not looking upon Creation?

 

[Thomas]

Ah, but to look upon nature is a revelation itself. For are you not looking upon Creation?

Indeed, but Creation is not God, although that is sufficient in itself — I'm sure we all have our own moments with nature, I know I do.

But nature is not the object of faith, and God is infinitely more, infinitely other than all that He manifests, in the same way that the Cause of All is infinitely more and other than all that is caused.

Thomas

 

[wil]

Agreed thomas....

As I see it when I push my hand into a glove....you don't see my fingers, you don't see my hand...you see the glove...but you can also see my hand, know that it is there...

the clouds the stars the trees....to me that is G!d pushing through the ethers/the heavens into the material...I touch the glove, but know what is behind it all...

 

[wil]

Agreed thomas....

As I see it when I push my hand into a glove....you don't see my fingers, you don't see my hand...you see the glove...but you can also see my hand, know that it is there...

the clouds the stars the trees....to me that is G!d pushing through the ethers/the heavens into the material...I touch the glove, but know what is behind it all...

 

[iBrian]

Indeed, but Creation is not God, although that is sufficient in itself — I'm sure we all have our own moments with nature, I know I do.

But nature is not the object of faith, and God is infinitely more, infinitely other than all that He manifests, in the same way that the Cause of All is infinitely more and other than all that is caused.

Thomas

Indeed, Creation does not define God any more than my little toenail defines myself.

But to presume God entirely separate is an entirely anthropic POV, and one that I'm afraid is becoming increasingly outdated - hasn't it been the lesson over recent years that many of our mistakes in dealing with complex problems (in environmentalism and sociology especially) is when we separate the constituents, and treat them as independent, we completely fail to appreciate their context in an overwhelming whole?

Ironically, you tell me that God is infinite, therefore cannot be explained, cannot be comprehended. Yet from this position of utter uncertainty you claim to be able to certainly tell me what the uncertainty is certainly not!! This is not a process like a Venn Diagram where you can say what God is and what God is not - if God is infinite, a mystery, beyond comprehension, then logically you can only say that you do not know what God is at all. And from such a position, be unable to assert what God may or may not be.

How can you therefore be sure that the cause and the caused are separate, when you have to accept you do not understand one of these and that both are related?

I fear this is mere word play, though. I think when we look at a person, we do not define them as entirely naked, but instead, our clothes are very much a part of what defines us - heck, that's why the Pope officiates wearing gold and white and purple, and not a pair of jeans and a t-shirt. Whether you look at the hand or the glove, there is still an object in motion that touches all.

 

[Aupmanyav]

Well, they had the revelation from none other than the son of God and God.

 

[taijasi]

Let's go back about 6 or 7 years and to the OP, since the current discussion has NOTHING to do with what this thread is about ... or about Jesus Christ, the real story.

Yes, there may have been some sort of historical Jesus ~ as a namesake, a latterday Good guy ~ who wanted us to remember [or whose parents wanted us to remember] the Teacher of Righteousness.

My quote shows up in the original post on this thread, because I'm one of the folks who maintains that the Christ Jesus of Christianity lived and died almost a full century before the {POSSIBLE} historical figure of 2000 years ago. Not that this is a huge deal, since most Christians cannot, or do not yet disentangle the lives of TWO of the Greatest Sons of God to walk our Earth in recent times:

One of these being Joshua, or `Jesus of Nazareth,' the Galilean Adept, and

The other being the Christ, or Chrishna, as Sri. Krishna was a former incarnation of the same Soul.

Now the process is the same for ALL of us, and thus, if you wish to understand anything further about Jesus, or Christ [than you have already been taught, even if by those who had good INTENTIONS in mind, despite so much error & inaccuracy] ~ you will also need to study the Royal Road by which THESE Great Souls achieved what THEY achieved, as you yourself are apparently entertaining a similar endeavor. Or at least, claim you wish to know more about it.

For those lacking fortitude, courage and determination, it's better to keep your feet on whatever Path you *already feel* {???} is most helpful for you. Where there is commitment, resolve and a definite improvement & strengthening of Character, you may rest assured, you will come to the Truth and the Wisdom in the natural Way, as have all the Sons of Men who have gone before you ... and who chose this means of approach.

Where there are those who wish to make themselves ready for Discipleship, however, it is Good to study the requirements, to familiarize yourself with what is asked of EACH of us, and if the examples of Joshua and of the The Christ still resound for you as something you wish to EMULATE, then take the words of THE CHRIST HIMSELF to Heart, and DO AS HE ASKED US TO.

Otherwise, one may certainly confine one's mode of enquiry and the thrust of one's questions to those that may be encountered in a philosophy class, or in the seminary, as we know quite well that 99% of the time, such efforts lead us along the slow-but-CERTAIN Way of Approach, rather than the far more difficult PATH of modern Discipleship. The latter is swift, but not for the faint of heart, for verily we have been told that MANY are called ... and FEW will be able to answer.

Nonetheless, if a KNOCK is put to the Door, if the Question is clearly framed, and if you will SEEK with full preparedness - ready for WHATEVER you might receive, then there again, the New Testament and Hebrew Scriptures inform you of what you may expect. And if there were ANY shadow of a doubt remaining within your heart or mind, rest assured ... the answers, the challenges, the Opportunities and thus, yes, the FACTS regarding the `real story' of the life of Jesus of Nazareth, and The Christ, WILL COME.

I bear witness to this fact, and to all that I say within this post.

Not sure yet? Then TRY.

But let's not pretend that there aren't folks who already Know some of the answers, who already LIVE the Christian Way in earnest, and that even among those who walk with Experience, Learning, Wisdom, Love and Knowledge ... there are even GREATER SOULS who are Sons of God in the SAME WAY as was Christ Jesus, and who LEAD others on the Way of true Disicpleship. For such are alive within the world today, and I & many thousands are well-acquainted with Them.

For Willing Teachers, Spiritually Empowered and charged BY GOD to Lead, there is no want. For STUDENTS who are Willing, Ready & EAGER to tread the Higher Way ... there is a dearth. Instead, there are millions of those with an idle curiosity, but mostly who just prefer flipping their tuppence into the change bin whenever they feel a pang of Conscience. Or standing in the soup line on the serving side, for the same reason. Strangely, most of us are ABLE to Serve ... if only we would COMMIT ourselves.

The truly humble have no problem admitting those all around them of Greater Learning, Greater Love and Greater Wisdom. Indeed, they verily Guide us TO such Great ones. It is the insecure, the spiritually bereft and morally bankrupt, and thowe within whom the fires of vanity, Pride & LITTLE EGO are burning strong, who fight most vehemently, and deny most passionately, that which the rest of us can PLAINLY see.

Namaskar

 

[Thomas]

Hi Brian —

But to presume God entirely separate is an entirely anthropic POV ...

But Brian, we do not presume that at all!

It is true we assert that the Divine Essence is entirely other than the Cosmos, but we equally assert that God is Immanently present to the Cosmos, in the Cosmos. Whilst God is present 'to' and 'in' (that is, to us and in us, in figurative terms), We do not believe that God is present as the Cosmos — the cosmos is not an object of worship.

Indeed, for us the act of creation is not a discreet moment at the beginning of time, but a dynamic continuum in every moment. The Cosmos is, from moment to moment, by a free and gratuitous act of God.

The question turns on the relationship between nature and Grace. For Christians, this relationship is 'more real' and more intimate than any relationship between any two consitituent elements of the Cosmos.

In that way God is Other, but not entirely separate — as the Moslems say, 'God is closer to you than your jugular vein' – but our point is God is in no way determined or qualified or categorised by the Cosmos with regard to His own 'nature' and 'being'. To assert that, I would suggest, is anthropomorphic.

... hasn't it been the lesson over recent years that many of our mistakes in dealing with complex problems (in environmentalism and sociology especially) is when we separate the constituents, and treat them as independent, we completely fail to appreciate their context in an overwhelming whole?

Yes ... but the point here is God is not a 'thing' like other 'things', and thus is not subject to classes or categories. God is not composite.

Ironically, you tell me that God is infinite, therefore cannot be explained, cannot be comprehended.

Well I would suggest it's evident from doctrine that we can comprehend and explain a great deal, but not everything.

God is a Spirit (John 4:24), God is Love (1 John 4:8). There is a very great clue here in the Johannine writings: "Dearly beloved, we are now the sons of God; and it hath not yet appeared what we shall be. We know, that, when he shall appear, we shall be like to him: because we shall see him as he is" (1 John 3:2). Of course, this text can only be properly understood within the context of the Holy Trinity (cf John 14:17, 15:26, 16:13, 1 Corinthians 12:3).

Yet from this position of utter uncertainty ...

Ah, no ... not by any means.

you claim to be able to certainly tell me what the uncertainty is certainly not!!

Does that seem illogical to you? Science does not hold all the answers, but it does hold a lot of them?

if God is infinite, a mystery, beyond comprehension, then logically you can only say that you do not know what God is at all. And from such a position, be unable to assert what God may or may not be.

Ah, hang on a moment. When we say 'mystery' we mean not the modern understanding, as in an Agatha Christie 'whodunnit', but in the Scriptural sense, of that which has been revealed (cf Mark 4:11, Luke 8:10, Romans 11:25).

+++

St John Damascene wrote a compendium of the Orthodox Faith in the 8th century. It opens thus:

No one hath seen God at any time; the Only-begotten Son, which is in the bosom of the Father, He hath declared Him. The Deity, therefore, is ineffable and incomprehensible. For no one knoweth the Father, save the Son, nor the Son, save the Father. And the Holy Spirit, too, so knows the things of God as the spirit of the man knows the things that are in him. Moreover, after the first and blessed nature no one, not of men only, but even of supramundane powers, and the Cherubim, I say, and Seraphim themselves, has ever known God, save he to whom He revealed Himself.

God, however, did not leave us in absolute ignorance. For the knowledge of God's existence has been implanted by Him in all by nature. This creation, too, and its maintenance, and its government, proclaim the majesty of the Divine nature ... With these things let us be satisfied, and let us abide by them, not removing everlasting boundaries, nor overpassing the divine tradition. It begins with an assertion of the incomprehensibility of God: for all that we can assert dogmatically, it remains axiomatic that here we are approaching something that by its very nature transcends human comprehension.

and

We, therefore, both know and confess that God is without beginning, without end, eternal and everlasting, uncreate, unchangeable, invariable, simple, uncompound, incorporeal, invisible, impalpable, uncircumscribed, infinite, incognisable, indefinable, incomprehensible, good, just, maker of all things created, almighty, all-ruling, all-surveying, of all overseer, sovereign, judge; and that God is One, that is to say, one essence; and that He is known, and has His being in three subsistences, in Father, I say, and Son and Holy Spirit ... But neither do we know, nor can we tell, what the essence of God is, or how it is in all, or how the Only-begotten Son and God, having emptied Himself, became Man of virgin blood, made by another law contrary to nature, or how He walked with dry feet upon the waters. It is not within our capacity, therefore, to say anything about God or even to think of Him, beyond the things which have been divinely revealed to us, whether by word or by manifestation, by the divine oracles at once of the Old Testament and of the New.

In coming to know God, we shall be overwhelmed by that which transcendas and exhausts any knowledge we may have of Him ... this is the last and highest Dark Night of the Soul.

Whether you look at the hand or the glove, there is still an object in motion that touches all.

But we discern between the glove and the hand within, and we do not worship the glove, that is the point.

A blessed Lent to you,

Thomas

 

[AdvaitaZen]

In coming to know God, we shall be overwhelmed by that which transcendas and exhausts any knowledge we may have of Him ... this is the last and highest Dark Night of the Soul.

Do you not see your own absurdity here? You have tried to tell us about God, then you say this knowledge does not come close... so why say it at all?

To say God is not some thing, you limit God, the mistake is only to say this alone is God, for all is that. Maybe you simply have not met this dark night of the soul? I must question why you would talk of it though if you haven't experienced it. It is the very seeing that your religion, your beliefs were all for naught. This is shocking for an avid Christian, but exactly that is needed - instantly the delusion ceases and you find you are that.

You worship your own potential, why not realize it instead?

I and my father are one.
I am that I am.
God became man not so that man can become God, but to show him he never wasn't.
Just look more closely at who claims 'I'.
Drop all else - the me - and find your original face.
You are not your identifications.
Stop giving the false your attention.
What changes?

You are free.

 

[Thomas]

Do you not see your own absurdity here?

It is a great pity that people assume that what they don't understand must therefore be absurd.

Allow me to offer a reflection, from Meister Eckhart himself:

Many a lofty intellect, angels not excepting (for in life and nature an angel is nothing but pure mind), has erred and lapsed eternally from the eternal truth and this may happen also to those who, like the angels, preserve their idiosyncrasy and find satisfaction in the exercise of their own intelligence ... If you would know and recognize the really sane and genuine seers of God, whom nothing can deceive nor misinform, they can be detected by four and twenty signs. (Signs of the True Ground, Meister Eckhart)

Thomas

 

[AdvaitaZen]

It is a great pity that people assume that what they don't understand must therefore be absurd.

Allow me to offer a reflection, from Meister Eckhart himself:


Thomas

You have missed my point because of your knowledge.

Stop applying what your tradition has added, while you see it as truth - and while no doubt Jesus knew the truth - it has actually brought you further away.

Who believes?

What have these beliefs accomplished?

Do you need information to live as truth?

I am not interested in what you can quote, I am interested in what was there before notions of God and Jesus came in.

That is never touched by any concept.

 

[Thomas]

You have missed my point ...

Oh dear. Sadly, AdvaitaZen, I don't think so.

Allow me to cite the Common and Angelic Doctor but, please do not make the immediate assumption that Aquinas is neither as clever nor as illumined as you ... you'll just make an ass of yourself.

... As other sciences do not argue in proof of their principles, but argue from their principles to demonstrate other truths in these sciences: so this doctrine does not argue in proof of its principles, which are the articles of faith, but from them it goes on to prove something else ... whereas the highest of them, viz. metaphysics, can dispute with one who denies its principles, if only the opponent will make some concession; but if he concede nothing, it can have no dispute with him, though it can answer his objections.
Hence Sacred Scripture, since it has no science above itself, can dispute with one who denies its principles only if the opponent admits some at least of the truths obtained through divine revelation; thus we can argue with heretics from texts in Holy Writ, and against those who deny one article of faith, we can argue from another. If our opponent believes nothing of divine revelation, there is no longer any means of proving the articles of faith by reasoning, but only of answering his objections — if he has any — against faith. Since faith rests upon infallible truth, and since the contrary of a truth can never be demonstrated, it is clear that the arguments brought against faith cannot be demonstrations, but are difficulties that can be answered.

The point, it seems to me, is that you want to contend with me about the nature and meaning of Christian doctrine, and yet it is evident that your understanding of the doctrine is founded on a number of erroneous assumptions.