Was Jesus God Incarnate? Or Was He A Son of Man?

[Sarah88]

(edited for copyright purposes-proud patriot Moderator Democratic Underground)


Since “holy wars” are being fought over who or what God is, this is an extremely important subject, and the conflict won’t be resolved without the words of the person who truly serves the Spirit of truth, called son of man according to both Judaic prophecy and Christian prophecy, and other names in the prophecies of other religions. But the names are not as important as the message he delivers.

However, since Christianity is the largest religion in the world, it is important to understand that the term “son of man” is used in Judaic scriptures in the Torah and Tanach referring to prophets, certain kings, and other key witnesses and servants of God. There were many who were called son of man, and Jesus was one of them. He himself said so.

But, as you know, many Christians have been led to believe that Jesus was not a son of man, but was conceived by magic in the womb of a virgin, and was therefore “the only begotten son of God,” and even “God incarnate.”

Most Christian believe in the fourth century Nicene Creed, which makes that claim. But that is problematic, for many reasons. For example, the virgin birth claim is based on an inaccurate reference to Isaiah 7:14, even though it is actually about a dispute over land and leadership that took place during the time Isaiah wrote about it, and had nothing to do with Jesus. In fact, while the Immanuel in the book of Isaiah was still a child, Isaiah says that the Assyrians were to conquer the lands of Aram and Israel, which they did in 733-732 B.C., only a year or two after the prophecy was given and 733 years before Jesus was even born. Furthermore, Isaiah 7:14, which the author or revisionists of the book of Matthew used to claim Jesus was born of a "virgin" to fulfill Isaiah's prophecy, does not even speak of a virgin. The Hebrew word "almah" in the book of Isaiah was erroneously translated as "virgin" and actually means "young woman." And, while the Hebrew word that actually does mean "virgin" ("bethulah") appears four times in Isaiah 23:12, 37:22, 47:1, 62:5, the author was well aware of the word for virgin and yet purposely did not use it in Isaiah 7:14.

(snip)

[hedgehog]

1. Yes & yes

[trotsky]

2. Neither.

It's just a story.

[raccoon]

42. Like Robin Hood. nt

[H2O Man]

14. Correct.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

3. all three

the father, the son and the holy ghost.

[struggle4progress]

4. I'm afraid you will find us to be a very tough crowd here

[Political_Junkie]

5. This should be fun.

:popcorn:

[Monk06]

6. Hercules son of Zeus. Gods banging mortal virgins. It's a Greek thing

[riverbendviewgal]

7. The most believable story of Jesus I ever read was in

the book URANTIA.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Urantia_Book

I was raised a Catholic but once in my teens realized that it was a very restrictive religion that left me with a lot of unanswered questions.

I went on in life to be agnostic, spiritual, looking within myself. believing change comes from within.

My friend introduced me to the book URANTIA and the only chapter I read was on Jesus life. I found that it was the most believable account of his life I have ever read.

It is quite detailed, including the events of his life from 12 to 30, which the christian religion never speaks of

[RaleighNCDUer]

8. Nice of you to try to be inclusive, but I really don't see how this applies

to atheists.

We don't play in that ballpark.

[leftofcool]

9. No and No but he was probably a good Essene

[Sarah88]

22. Yes, he was, and so were Joseph, Mary, James & Elizabeth

They all followed the teaching of the elder Essenes, like Hillel the Elder, the Teacher of Righteousness.

[MineralMan]

10. Doesn't apply to atheists at all. We don't believe in any sort

of supernatural entity. It's all nonsense to us.

[Name removed]

11. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[muriel_volestrangler]

16. Thanks, charlie - yours is the most important post in this thread

The 'JJ Adamson' stuff turns up every year or so on DU, from a new poster who posts about almost nothing else once they've achieved enough posts to start a thread.

Forget the questions about the status of Jesus; the OP is about 'Adamson'. I don't know if it's relevant that my Opera browser is flagging all the links in the OP as 'illegal url' - that may just mean they've been typed wrong in some way, or there may be a greater concern. Anyway, the purpose of the thread is to direct people to "Adamson's" web site.

[trotsky]

23. Holy crap, I had forgotten all about that nut!

Nice memory, charlie! Thanks for pointing it out.

[ChadwickHenryWard]

24. Are you saying to OP is a sock puppet?

Sockpuppetry is against the rules. If you have grounds to, you should alert.

[Sarah88]

32. Charlie, why does it matter to you who I am?

What matters is the truth. It's the truth that will ultimately set us free -- more specifically, the Spirit of truth.

It could be said that the modern son of man is a Nobody who's mission it is to enable us all to be Somebody.

That's the point.

The son of man serves the Spirit of truth, and he doesn't exalt himself. He doesn't seek official office in religion or government, nor does he even speak from behind a pulpit or podium. He doesn't cause his voice to be heard in public as an orator. His voice is heard only in song. He seeks only to liberate and empower us all.

As for who I am, I'm just a Nobody too. I just want to help the Spirit of truth get through to more people. That's what a growing number of us are doing.

[Silent3]

35. "a growing number of us"

I think the correct phrase is "a growing number of me". :)

[charlie]

36. Uh-uh

We've been through this before. I'm not going to do it again so you can pretend it's new to you.

Pick a handle and stick with it. Speak as yourself, for yourself.

Better advice: Keep the stuff about being a biblical herald to yourself. Don't link to your sites, they're tainted with that nonsense. Just talk with everybody and you won't get chased off boards so often. You'll likely have a great time here.

I can't believe I have to explain to the Son of Man how not to alienate people.

[Sarah88]

38. Thanks.

I'm sorry that I've apparently alienated you. That certainly was not my intent.

Fortunately, it seems that I have not alienated most readers. Only a few.

I do appreciate the advice, though.

[olegramps]

57. Where do we send the donations?

[Mugweed]

12. Religion is stupid

Why pray to fairy tales when you can concentrate on your own real life?

[DeSwiss]

13. No.

- The Jesus Myth was the last in a long line of related myths, dating back at least 12,000 years or more, all of which had to do primarily with the worshiping of the SUN and with the motion of the planets, the stars and use of zodiacs and calendars created by humans to track them. In fact almost all of the symbiology, the snakes, the roses, the oils, the baptisms, the virgin mothers -- all of them are knock-offs and/or outright thefts of rituals and symbols of older religions that preceded it.

But since facts don't usually hold much sway with religionists because most fear:

1) the very idea of a challenge to the reality of their deity (or that deity's potential loss from their lives),
2) their religious rituals,
3) the emotional and social connections their religion has created within their lives,
4) and all the other trappings (singing, finding mates, the Bingo, the daycare, choir, the emotional blotting paper that is serves in helping us deal with the frustrations and the more tragic and trying of life's moments, etc.), that go along with that

So I don't expect (nor have I seen but a few), who are willing to, or who have the necessary courage to challenge their beliefs and regimented thinking which has been implanted within them since childhood in most cases. And to risk all of that by taking an intellectual voyage of discovery to learn the truth about their beliefs -- how their religions evolved into what it is now, and where their religions actually came from, because that's not what "faith" is all about. Now, is it?

The institution(s) of religion are man-made edifices designed to contain and control a man-made idea. Religion is about the establishment, maintenance and institutionalization -- as well as the perpetuation and proselytization of a "god idea." Such a bulwark is necessary to withstand the assaults of the truth and of reality. Because no matter what evidence is proffered to the contrary and no matter what facts are discovered to discount it's veracity, it is the institution of religion that must survive.

That is religion's main purpose -- its own survival. So, when a religious truth is no longer valid, it's just not mentioned anymore, or excuses and rationalizations are given to the religious adherents as to why the "sell-date" on a certain aspect of their beliefs have been reached, and are thus no longer applicable. For example, as when some religions allow women to speak in church, even though their holy books clearly prohibit it. And why slavery is no longer cache' even though their texts say it's all right. Even if one chooses to beat the hell out of one's slaves, that's okay but not so popular as it once was when the religion and churches condoned it. And then on the next page they can speak of god's love without batting an eye.

In any event, if there is anyone interested in the truth, here are a couple of good places to start. And since the answers to your questions have been around for a very long time now, it's all free:



http://www.archive.org/details/biblemythsandthe00doanuoft">Bible Myths and Parallels In Other Pagan Religions

http://www.authorama.com/god-idea-of-the-ancients-1.html">The God Idea of the Ancients

[muriel_volestrangler]

17. That second link of yours is bizarre

By Chapter VI, it's claiming the existence of an ancient, wise civilization now completely forgotten.

Toward the close of the eighteenth century the celebrated astronomer, Bailly, published a work entitled The History of Ancient Astronomy, in which he endeavored to prove that a nation possessed of profound wisdom and great genius, and of an antiquity far superior to the Hindoos or Egyptians, “inhabited the country to the north of India, or about fifty degrees north latitude.” This writer has shown that “the most celebrated astronomical observations and inventions, from their peculiar character, could have taken place only in these latitudes, and that arts and improvements gradually travelled thence to the equator.”

A colony of Brahmins settled near the Imans, and in Northern Thibet, where in ancient times they established celebrated colleges, particularly at Nagraent and Cashmere. In these institutions the treasures of Sanskrit literature were supposed to be deposited. The Rev. Mr. Maurice was informed that an immemorial tradition prevailed at Benares that all the learning of India came from a country situated in forty degrees of northern latitude. Other writers are of the opinion that civilization proceeded from Arabia; that the old Cushite race carried commerce, letters, and laws to all the nations of the East. Which of these theories is true, if either, may not with certainty be proved at present; yet that in the far distant past a race of people existed whose achievements exceeded those of any of the historic nations may not be doubted.

http://www.authorama.com/god-idea-of-the-ancients-8.html

It appears to have been written in the late 19th or early 20th century - another book by the author is dateed 1916 ( http://books.google.com/books?id=9hmgAAAAMAAJ&q=%22Eliza+Burt+Gamble%22&dq=%22Eliza+Burt+Gamble%22&source=bl&ots=1YgX-3MAmp&sig=1b55sazeort-V5REwaVC1tXz0Dc&hl=en&ei=mEWBS4mbA5S7jAfCtdymBA&sa=X&oi=book_result&ct=result&resnum=8&ved=0CCEQ6AEwBw )
and it uses old-fashioned spelling like 'Hindoo'. Really, it looks like complete guesswork without any proper archaeology, anthropology or justifications for its claims.

[rug]

19. I bet it uses "Mohammedans" too.

[DeSwiss]

25. Most things about religion tend toward the bizzare, in my experience.

Gamble's work is indeed an early one from the very beginnings in the development social theories and the various social behavior schools that would later come. And as a women in this field at the time, she was not readily accepted in all of the collegial halls of thought in Europe nor here America. At the time, with exception of some of the more Bohemian schools, few were.

If you look at each segment in this work, from the way it is laid -out (under the bold lines), a citation is given in italics to show the source she is citing which directly relates to the points she asserts (not the format we're used to using footnotes, etc). Her work is largely a compilation of the work of others in many ways. She uses them as a means to describe and defend her own thesis which she contends was religious-gender role reversal.

The segment you note relating to "an ancient, wise civilization" in your post, comes from http://www.scribd.com/doc/3839526/Anacalypsis-V-2Godfrey-Higgins1927643pgsREL-sml">Godfrey Higgins' work on "Celtic Druids". http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godfrey_Higgins">Godfrey Higgins was a was an early 19th century archaeologist. He was also a Freemason and a Fellow of the Society of Antiquaries and considered an expert of his day as a historian of religions.

The peer-reviewed studies as we expect today didn't exist in the social fields at this point (nor many others at the time). However, the bibliographies she cites in her work include just some of the following:

Edwin Arnold, The light of Asia.
Anacalypsis, vol. i., p. 232.
Drummond, On the Zodiacs, p. 36.
Quoted by John D. Baldwin, Prehistoric Nations, p. 62.
See The Evolution of Woman, p. 238.
Prehistoric Nations, p. 341.
See History of Persia.
Rawlinson, History of Herodotus, app., book ii., ch. viii.
Renouf, Religion of Ancient Egypt, p. 81.
Book ii., ch. xxxv.
Hargrave Jennings, Phallicism.
Primitive Culture, vol. i., p. 295.
Max Muller, Origin and Growth of Religion, p. 279.
Essays on Symbolism, p. 84.
Rivers of Life, vol. i., p. 35.
Rivers of Life, vol. i., p, 36.
Ancient Faiths Embodied in Ancient Names, vol. ii., p. 448.
Epistles of Cyprian, vol. i., pp. 215-217.
Quoted by Baldwin, Prehistoric Nations, p. 223.
Rivers of Life, vol. i., p. 70.
Essays on Symbolism, p. 74.
Wilford, Asiatic Researches.
Faiths of Man in All Lands, vol. i., p. 68.
Borlaise.
Barlow, Symbolism, p. 98.
Symbolism of Ancient Art.
Anacalypsis, book vii., ch. xi.
Quoted in Anacalypsis.
Essays on Symbolism, p. 118.

- To me, the bibliography of her work alone is worth the reading of it. But then I admit that I'm a bibliophile of the first water.

on edit: spelling

[muriel_volestrangler]

29. The thing is, it may all be made up, just like that bit

She states the existence of this ancient race as undeniable, but we know it's rubbish. And her claim is that this ancient race is why you find similarities between religions. If she just takes the word of obscure 18th and 19th century writers as fact, we have absolutely no idea how reliable any of it is at all. We also have no idea if she quoted them correctly, or out of context.

[DeSwiss]

34. That I believe in the reality of religious syncretism.....

...is without a doubt. That Gamble's work has anything to do with this or that I stated that her work does, is not the case.

Gamble's contention is that early religions were female-dominated affairs, or at least a shared religious importance as is evidenced by the pantheons of ancient religions. There were in fact ancient races, although many existed before writing and as such left behind a very cryptic history for us to try and discern now.

In fact, in November 2008 German archaeologist Klaus Schmidt discovered in Turkey what may be the world's oldest temple. Called Gobekli Tepe, it predates Stonehenge by six thousand years, and Smithsonian magazine writes that "the find upends the conventional view of the rise of civilization:"

Six miles from Urfa, an ancient city in southeastern Turkey, Klaus Schmidt has made one of the most startling archaeological discoveries of our time: massive carved stones about 11,000 years old, crafted and arranged by prehistoric people who had not yet developed metal tools or even pottery. The megaliths predate Stonehenge by some 6,000 years. The place is called Gobekli Tepe, and Schmidt, a German archaeologist who has been working here more than a decade, is convinced it's the site of the world's oldest temple...

You may go directly to the original article at the Smithsonian Magazine if you want to learn more about this discovery: http://www.smithsonianmag.com/history-archaeology/gobekli-tepe.html?c=y&page=1#">LINK

Suffice it to say, in my original response to the OP I suggested that those two works that I included in my response were to indicate "a beginning point" for those who sought begin a journey of discovery. And that is as I sincerely meant it. A beginning point for "your" journey. I've have personally been at my own journey for over 40 years.

Good luck with yours. :hi:

[Sarah88]

21. Thanks for your comment on YouTube.

I'm glad you liked his songs, and we appreciate your "Excellent!" comment.

[DeSwiss]

26. You're very welcome.

:pals:

[GliderGuider]

15. What's wrong with him simply being a very wise man, along with Mohammed, Buddha and Baha'u'llah?

If one accepts that he was an actual historical personality (and my jury is still out on that) there's no reason to think he was anything other than a very wise and insightful mystic. Any apotheosis has been placed on him by other men.

[Sarah88]

39. Good point, and true to a certain extent.

Jesus did fulfill prophecies about being born in the line of David, in that he was the son of Joseph, who was born in that line. He was also "brought as a lamb to slaughter" as a sacrificial lamb of God, as Isaiah foretold. But it's the next son of man who fulfills Judeo-Christian prophecies, and he's not Jesus.

I find it interesting that you'd mention Baha'u'llah. He thought he was that son of man, fulfilling all religious prophecies. But, even though his teachings are great, he was not the one who fulfills all the prophecies. That would not happen, and could not happen, until the end of the age (or aeon) that Jesus ushered in. And we are drawing even closer to the end of that age, toward the beginning of the new, which is why the son of man is here now.

[laconicsax]

47. I think you're missing something.

First: Jews trace lineage through the maternal line so it doesn't matter who the father was, Mary would have to be a direct descendant of David for the prophecy to be fulfilled.
Second: Even if we ignore the first part, Jesus still isn't a descendant of David since he's supposed to be the son of God. Joseph was supposedly an adoptive father.

Jesus prophesied that the end of the world would take place within the lifetime of his disciples. That didn't happen. No amount of hand waving can cover up the fact that if the Gospels are true, then Jesus was a false prophet that started an apocalyptic death cult that's been predicting the end of the world for the last 2000 years.

[Sarah88]

56. No, that's not true.

The geneology of Jesus is traced through his father, Joseph, who was born in the line of David, Abraham, Isaac, Jacob and other males in that line. It's a myth that Jesus was born of a virgin. He was literally a son of man.

Jesus did not prophesy that the end of the world would take place during the lifetime of his disciples. In fact, he said prophecy would be fulfilled at the end of the aeon or age that he ushered in (the age of conflict and division). His followers misunderstood and created the myth of the "end times," and they were wrong about it. And whether that myth was created by the immediate followers, or later followers who may have revised the gospels to suit their own purposes, it's just a myth.

[PassingFair]

18. Was Mary raped, or did she have consensual immaculate sex?

I can't figure it out.

[Sarah88]

20. Thank you for your responses. Here's mine.

(First, sorry I messed up the links. But his web site is http://reformationcomingsoon.bravehost.com. His songs are on YouTube.com and Soundclick.com under his singers name.)

To those who believe in the Nicene Creed:
Some of you said that Jesus is both God Incarnate and Son of Man. But Jesus was not born of a virgin, as the article points out, and as is fully explained in the article/page The Virgin Birth Story. Jesus was a son of Joseph. His lineage is from David only through Joseph, not Mary. Furthermore, the stories of the “virgin” birth are found only in the gospels of Matthew and Luke, both written near the end of the first century. Earlier writers, such as Paul and Mark, and even John, make no mention of it because they either didn’t know about it or the story did not yet exist.

To Atheists:
The message is relevant to agnostics and atheists because it is Jeffersonian in nature, advocating freedom from religion for those who want it, with freedom of religion for those who want it, but with a wall of separation between religion and government. The message addresses religion to turn the tables on bigoted “religious” zealots, and it calls for a new reformation, particularly of Judaism, Christianity and Islam.

To All:
As is explained in the article/pages Native American Indian Prophecies, and Prophecies Re: The One to Come, the modern son of man fulfills the prophecies of all religions. Otherwise there would be chaos. So, there will not be different individuals to fulfill the role of the Kalki Avatar of Hinduism, the Mashiach of Judaism, the Buddha Maitreya of Buddhism, the Saoshyant of Zoroastrianism, the Christ of Christianity; the Imam Mahdi of Islam, Melchizedek the King of Peace, or the Hopi’s Pahana, the Mayan’s Kukulcan, or the Aztec’s Quetzalcoatl.

This son of man assumes none of those titles, but he fulfills all those prophecies as a genuine, authentic servant-messenger of God. That is the only title he claims, because he is your fellow servant, from your midst, of your brethren, and but one pillar of the temple of God. There is no “spiritual hierarchy,” because we are all equal joint heirs to the “throne” of the new “kingdom” to come. And we will have government that is actually of, by, and for the people.

[dmallind]

28. errmmm....John postdates both Matthew and Luke. NT

[Sarah88]

30. Of course. I should have said ...

I should have said "and even the later book of John," rather than just "even John." My point, however, is accurate.

[dmallind]

27. ...and here I was hoping for a meaty discussion of adoptionism based on the title....

...how disappointing.

[Sarah88]

31. Regarding adoptionism ...

Of course many Christian Apologists do rationalize that since it was Joseph that was born in the line of David, not Mary, Joseph "adopted" the "virgin" Mary's son Jesus, thereby esablishing his geneological line by inheritanc rather than by blood.

That claim, however, is bogus. Blood lines and "seed" were of utmost importance in establishing geneology. The "adoption" defense, therefore, is an invalid one.

[dmallind]

33. No, adoptionism is the doctrine that Jesus was born human and made divine by God

Either just before death or immediately after. There are scriptural refernces that downright state that he was made divine, and others that say he was born divine,

[Sarah88]

37. Either way ...

There are some New Testament scriptures that contradict each other, some that are unclear as to their time frame (such as "this geration shall not pass, till all these things be fulfilled”), and some that not only contradict each other but are incompatible with the Old Testament.

But I'd be glad to discuss anything with you, if you wish.

I think what's important is that light be shed on issues that have caused conflict and division. As you probably know, the Greek word "Apocalypse" means to “uncover, reveal, or unveil” the truth that has been ignored, forgotten, misinterpreted and misunderstood, and the phrase "apokalupsis eschaton" literally means “revelation at the end of the aeon, or age.”

That revelation has been revealed, for all to see.

[dmallind]

40. There is no other way. Adoptionism in the context of Christology means one thing

...and it's perfectly reasonable and fine either to know that or not to know that. But in the latter case trying to establish yourself as an authority or even informed layman with anything interesting to say to other informed laymen on the topic is going to be pretty tricky.

[Sarah88]

44. You're right about that. It's tricky.

It's a tall order. "Be as wise as serpents, and as harmless as doves." Now that's tricky.

[dmallind]

45. Or...just know what you're talking about maybe? Hell there's plenty I know crap about

But I don't go around lecturing people who do. Where I am ighnorant I ask questions or deal with equally beginner level people, rather than try to guide or lecture those who know more.

[Sarah88]

53. Re: "Those who know more."

I acknowledge that many people know more than I do.

Even the modern son of man acknowledges that many spiritual teachers know more about their religions than he does, and that many biblical scholars know more about what is written in scriptures than he does.

He acknowledges that he turned to the Bible only eight years after he was carried away in spirit to the high and holy place where God inhabits eternity. And then he was shown exactly how and why he is a son of man fulfilling Judeo-Christian prophecy.

He uses biblical scriptures not only to prove who and what he is, but also to turn the tables on hypocritical "biblical experts" on the Christian Right who can quote the bible chapter and verse but don't know what it means.

Intellectual knowledge of what others have written does not bring Wisdom as Solomon defined it, nor as the author of the book of Wisdom defined it. True Wisom comes from within, by divine refelation, not from books.

[Deep13]

41. I'm not being sarcastic. You first have to prove he actually existed.

Until you do that, everything else is merely hypothetical. Since the NT depends upon JC's divinity for its authority, you really can't rely on it as proof.

BTW, concluding that JC was not god incarnate puts you outside of the Nicean churches and squarely in heresy.

[Sarah88]

43. The impartial Jewish historian, Flavius Josephus, said so too.

Josephus reported that "Jesus won over many of the Jews and Greeks." And he was not a Christian. He merely reported on the phenomenon, because Jesus drew the attention of multitudes of people, both Jew and Greek.

I would agree that the NT depends opon the idea that Jesus was "Lord and Savior" and "born of a virgin" as "God's only son" to establish its authority. That's why the Emperors Constantine and Theodosius pushed it. It suited their purposes just fine.

I would also agree that we can't rely on its proof, because in fact the claims made in the Nicene Creed are not true. Jesus was a lord and a host -- not the Lord of hosts. He was a son of man, the son of Joseph. But that doesn't take away from the fact that he was a spiritually anointed mashiach and prophet, and Avatar for the passing age.

[Deep13]

46. Josephus was not a witness.

He was relying on the same stories that the writers of the cannonical gospels relied on. You are probably right in saying he was reporting on the Christian phenomenon in the sense of it being a social fact.

I'm not clear on the distinction between "Lord of hosts" and "lord and host."

And I think you are still pretty far from proving that JC was "spiritually anointed mashiach and prophet, and Avatar for the passing age" (presumably by god) as a fact.

[Sarah88]

50. Regarding Josephus and ...

Yes, Flavius Josephus mentions Jesus as the brother of James the Just, and the New Testament also speaks of James as the brother of Jesus. But that doesn’t necessarily mean that Josephus’ mention of Jesus postdates the gospels. Some scholars conclude that Josephus reported that "Jesus won over many Jews and many of the Greeks" independently, not because of the gospels.

Regarding the distinctions between "Lord of hosts" and "lord and host" -- God is the Lord of hosts and Lord of lords. Jesus was a lord and a host. Jesus knew the difference, which is why he said "God is greater than I."

Jesus did not fulfill most Judaic prophecies. They are being fulfilled now at the end of the age Jesus ushered in. However, Jesus did fulfill two of them in that he was born in the genealogical line of David through his father Joseph, and in that he was "brought as a lamb to slaughter" and was whipped and punished as the prophet Isaiah mentioned.

Many non-Christians acknowledge that the Christ Jesus was a prophet and the Avatar for the passing age. They do not accept that Jesus was "God Himself," though, because that is not true even according to the words of Jesus himself.

[RagAss]

48. A teacher on Non-Duality...killed for his radical beliefs.

[GliderGuider]

49. His non-dualism is very clear in the Gospel of Thomas.

In some of those verses he sounds like a Zen master.

[Sarah88]

52. Yes, that's true.

The gospels of Thomas, Philip and Mary Magdalene give us more the story.

[Sarah88]

51. Yes indeed.

Jesus said that we should judge not, lest we be so judged, and we should let out "eye" be single, not clouded by the illusion of duality.

In fact, he said that because the "forbidden fruit from the tree of the knowledge of good and evil" causes spiritual blindness and an illusion of duality. It's about judgmental egotism, not about sex.

[RagAss]

54. ...yes....true...and "the two must become one to enter the kingdom"

[Sarah88]

55. Yes, and I'm so glad you said that. Look at this:

A PLACE IN THE SUN

The feeling in my heart, it shows me the way,
To be free to do all I can do.
So I’ll follow the way of my heart today,
And know that the dream will come true.

I can make one of my two minds.
Cast out doubt and dwell on faith.
Leave that critic and that accuser behind.
Follow the way of a child at play.

So I don’t stay in a self-made prison.
I take courage and dare to make a change (if only in my mind).
We can all find our own place in the sun,
Even if it’s not home, home on the range.

Sometimes I find my way by no choice of my own.
Some things turn out right that I once thought wrong.
And the bonds of desire for approval were blown,
By the truth that I found in this song.

My accusers have said I have failed them.
They have said I have feet of clay.
But I could not live my life to please only them.
I have my own dues to pay.

No I don’t stay in a self-made prison.
I take courage and dare to make a change (if only in my mind).
We can all find our own place in the sun,
Even if it’s not home, home on the range.

So don’t stay in a self-made prison.
Take courage and dare to make a change (if only in your mind).
We can all find our own place in the sun,
Even if it’s not home, home on the range.


© 2008 LBMC (Revised slightly from the original written in 1983.)
Written and recorded by David J. Nunson.

To listen, search for David on YouTube, or go to http://www.soundclick.com/davidjnunson

[IndianaGreen]

58. He was the son of Miriam and Yosef

and he is long gone and dead.

[saltpoint]

59. Virgin birth does not seem to me to be the way it works.

I like the socialist bent of the ministry of Jesus but the wondrous miracles are a bit much.

[sam sarrha]

60. actually, your question is a result of an ongoing debate whether a Greek Diphthong.. a word meaning ...

"IS" or "as" depending on how it is used in a sentence. this started a debate that resulted in a schism of the church that resulted in the division of the Church into Catholic and Greek Orthodox...and millions of dead in the resulting Lilliputian wars over who was right/wrong

Jesus "IS" God or Jesus "AS" God... they were both wrong.

[sam sarrha]

61. old story about Mary being raped by roman soldier, Josef married her to prevent her being stoned.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/2008/apr/23/news2
Paul Verhoeven, no stranger to controversy, is set to unleash a revisionist biography of Jesus in September which claims that far from being the son of God, Christ was probably fathered by a Roman soldier who raped Mary during an uprising in Galilee.