Excellent. My question is this; Could it not be a third option…That man misinterpreted his words? Because he left us nothing directly are we not relying on man and placing our faith more in man then God? I don’t expect a response. These are the things I wrestle with.
There's a fourth possibility: Legend. This means that we don't actually have what Jesus said, but only what those who wrote about him claimed for him. It's interesting that only the gospel of John, which was written last, explicitly makes this claim. If it was actually something Jesus said, wouldn't the earliest gospels claim it as well? Wouldn't Paul, who wrote before the gospels, use it in his gospel? We only have the gospel of John's claim, which really doesn't count as evidence at all; at it's best, it's only hearsay.
This argument should be put to rest. It is only for the profoundly naive. It’s begs the question - assuming 1) that the Gospels contain what he actually said, and 2) that what he said is properly understood/interpreted from the perspective of a Hebrew/Jew. Miracles, belief, sorcery, dreams/visions, do not mean now what they did then.
So you better believe Christians interpretation is wrong. 2000 years of people in church studying and interpreting that Jesus believed he was son of God and part of the Trinity, all wrong. You are right, definitely.
Excellent.
My question is this; Could it not be a third option…That man misinterpreted his words? Because he left us nothing directly are we not relying on man and placing our faith more in man then God?
I don’t expect a response. These are the things I wrestle with.
Jesus Christ is the only way, the only truth and life. Accept him as Lord and Saviour today!
There's a fourth possibility: Legend. This means that we don't actually have what Jesus said, but only what those who wrote about him claimed for him. It's interesting that only the gospel of John, which was written last, explicitly makes this claim. If it was actually something Jesus said, wouldn't the earliest gospels claim it as well? Wouldn't Paul, who wrote before the gospels, use it in his gospel? We only have the gospel of John's claim, which really doesn't count as evidence at all; at it's best, it's only hearsay.
Why do you think Jesus was crucified? It is well-established that he was tried for blasphemy. Everyone involved understood the claim he was making...
Because he was the King of the Jews and a nuissance to the Roman elite.
This was the age of the mystic, or messiah…they were everywhere, and it wasn’t uncommon to make this claim.
This argument should be put to rest. It is only for the profoundly naive. It’s begs the question - assuming 1) that the Gospels contain what he actually said, and 2) that what he said is properly understood/interpreted from the perspective of a Hebrew/Jew. Miracles, belief, sorcery, dreams/visions, do not mean now what they did then.
So you better believe Christians interpretation is wrong. 2000 years of people in church studying and interpreting that Jesus believed he was son of God and part of the Trinity, all wrong. You are right, definitely.