Evidence that Jesus admitted to being (the son of) God?

[EveningStar]

Glenburne, I will try very very hard not to laugh. All the points you made so strenuously in your letter I've tried to beat into certain heads on this and another nameless forum. Oh my, this is rich!

I was the first person ever to mention here that God foreknew that Christ would have to die for Earth to be successful. And I used the very verse you did to support it.

When I said I'd rather do too much than too little, I was trying to state this to balance out how I am perceived as being too extreme THE OTHER WAY.

Do you really think we are rivals? Oh Lord love you no! I added you as a friend on the forum because I really admired one of your posts. Perhaps you'll add me in return, hmm?

For all the armchair theologists that argue...sometimes bitterly...over theological constructs, I am one of the few that has the nerve to tell someone in my office what Christ has done for me. And not just because I see them wearing a crucifix, fish earrings and a bishop's mitre. I am not sitting at my computer desk vaguely hoping that God will fill in for my failure to spread the gospel. Oh no, not me, I do in fact spread it and I do believe God holds me accountable when I don't.

Oh dear but I needed that laugh. ME too strict, too extreme or too ecclesialatrist? Oh my, take a big virtual hug, you fond mook!

[Glenburne]

At least laughter is good for the soul... Your more recent posts have seemed a little unclear because of the many analogies you have used. Not that analogies are always a bad thing; it was just becoming hard to understand exactly what you meant. I was trying to make sure we all were clear on exactly what we were debating.

At any rate, smile all you like. It takes fewer muscles than frowning.

[inkspot]

Originally Posted by Glenburne

Secondly, the earlier and higher laws determined by God's character were satisfied in Christ's death. God is just--thus, someone had to die, either sinners or someone sinless.

How do you figure justice was done by the death of an innocent man? That is certainly a huge miscarriage of justice. What court in the land would accept the death of an innocent man as justice for the victims of, say, a murderer? The cross is not, to my mind, a case of justice, but of grave injustice against Christ. Even our beloved CSL said the same in Mere Christianity - He posited a totally different reason why Christ had to die...

[EveningStar]

In all fairness to everyone, the Bible itself is unclear about why Jesus' death worked the way it did, why it was required, or if accepted by the Jews as the Messiah he would have needed to die. Not only the great theologians of my church, but the great theologians of all Christian churches have to admit they are unsure. There are about a dozen theories, each of which has evidence, more than one of which may be partially the right answer at the same time, and none of which are an absolute smoking gun.

We know it worked. And that's great. How exactly and why have not been set in stone. This gets muddied when preachers or priests presume to speak of it as if they did know. Especially when it's a preacher or priest whose life is exemplary and whose love for us is deep and genuine and self sacrificial. Just remember, my mother loves me enough to die for me in an instant, but she can never get the words to "Some Enchanted Evening" right.

Take the Bible...just the Bible...and think about the horrible mess you'd have trying to come up with the one official interpretation of it for your denomination. Mostly questions such as "Is God the Father the chief God and Jesus just a vice God?" were answered by groups of people...usually 12 to 70 or so...who beat their heads against the wall, pulled their hair out, and eventually agreed to accept as a body the results of 51 percent of the last vote.

Do you KNOW what a Septuigent is? It's a group of 70 people. The Greek New Testament is called a Septuigent because 70 people out of all the people in the world decided the one right way to translate phrases like "Lift up your heads ye mighty gates" and the majority carries.

I live in the United States. I know how often a majority of the voters grew to resent their decision with bitter passions.

[inked]

Your account of the Septuaguint is a bit at variance with known information. You might check here for some leads on the matter:

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

[EveningStar]

Not a significant enough variance to render its value null and void. People don't seem to understand that many of the "official" interpretations of the Bible were made by groups of people who got together when someone, such as Constantine, said, "Handle this...just handle it...."

They could not accept the appearance that they couldn't answer all the great questions of life...such as whether Christ had a navel (because he's all human ... or is that an imperfection and therefore out of the question??).

Much as they made the Nicene Creed sound so pedantic and completest, as if someone said, "Be sure to mention that kicking an elephant with iron boots while facing west on a tuesday is a sin!" Using a creed to enforce every new decision on people by some sort of oath as a condition of receiving communion really rankles me.

Don't get me wrong. I understand that people in those days were that way about everything from how to plow fields to how to spank your children. But that's no reason to think people after the first century and before the 12th were somehow experts about God by modern standards when they weren't experts about ANYTHING else?

[inkspot]

Originally Posted by ES

This gets muddied when preachers or priests presume to speak of it as if they did know.

Exactly. This is why I wanted to clarify that saying, "God is just, so Jesus had to die" is not an explanation for the cross at all, and it rather perverts the idea of justice than anything else. On areas where the Bible isn't explicit, we should seek understanding but need not accept an outlandish idea as truth just because your church teaches it.

[EveningStar]

There is a fine line between keeping some sort of order in a body and micromanaging its spiritual beliefs. On the one hand I don't want kids being taught that Christ, Buddha and the Bab were all the same person. On the other hand, I don't want an official reason why Moses chose Jethro's eldest daughter for a wife.

The trick is where to draw the line. That line necessarily depends on who's drawing it, but like all human lines it should be regarded as a work in progress and CONSTANTLY SUBJECT TO RE-EVALUATION. Some congregations taught as an article of faith that the United States and the Soviet Union were Gog and Magog in Revelation and that they would gather to fight the last battle at the end of time. Even back in the 19th century William Miller thought he could pin down Revelation...once referred to as a mystery wrapped in an enigma...and he waited for the end of the world with a chart proving why both Daniel and Revelation prove the world is ending in 1834.... I don't know about you, but as 1834 approaches, I'm beginning to have my doubts about Parson Billy.

The Millerites were honest, hard working folks who wanted to save souls before it was too late. They only had four things fatally wrong with their theology, and those are "ONE", "EIGHT", "THREE" and "FOUR". Those four little numbers made them the laughing stock of their friends and neighbours and the butt of a lot of jokes for years to come.

What is your 1834? You don't have to have one AS LONG AS you have Jesus, Salvation, Repentence, and OPINIONS. People whose opinion was that the world would end in 1834 were never laughed at. People who sold their farms and went to stand on a mountain top were. All because they did not know the meaning of a few simple phrases in Englsh such as "PROBABLY WILL", "LIKELY SO" and "I THINK".

[inkspot]

I have a no-kill shelter. Dogs that are badly off go there to avoid being put down. But I also have a rule...only dogs that have been vaccinated for rabies before they came are eligible to be admitted. In comes a wonderful puppy with eyes to melt the coldest heart. He hasn't had his shot. I have a dozen unused doses in the refrigerator. Now I know that this dog has always been indoors and has never been out where he could have picked up the disease. The reason for the rule does not apply but the rule is the rule. So I point down the hall toward the door marked "Protective equipment with Oxygen must be worn at all times." Kill him.

I wouldn't. Trust me, I wouldn't. I would have given the little fellow the shot even if I'd had to pay for it out of pocket.

I would hate to think that made me more merciful than God himself. I was made in God's image. I would like to think my weakness for innocent little puppies with large brown eyes is part of that image. That I got it from Dad...my HEAVENLY Dad.

John I had a question for you regarding your illustration of the no-kill shelter and the puppy.

Would your reaction have been the same if the non-vaccinated dog brought to you had been a snarling pitbull ready to bite your face off who has obviously been trained to fight and raised on the streets and probably has fleas and possibly rabies himself?

Because I think Jesus' reaction is the same whether we look like the cute lil' puppy with the big brown eyes or whether we look like the beat-up pitbull who's trying to bite His hand off. I think Jesus is that foolishly in love with each of us that it doesn't matter what's been done to us or what hasn't been done for us ...

[EveningStar]

I have no problem with God being MORE merciful than I, my problem was with him being LESS merciful.

So many theological concepts I hear bandied about just don't have the sound of "truthiness", that certain ring of truth that makes you know they're right before you even see the supporting evidence.

While I don't equate faith with emotions...trust me on that...I also know that Jesus' more unexpected remarks still had truthiness, even though they went against the common beliefs of the time. Jesus healed on the Sabbath, something that shocked people who had been raised to believe it was wrong. Yet ask a little child to accept that Mommy's bleeding to death but the doctor can't help her because it's his day of rest...God said so...and see if that has truthiness to her. Even a child knows you go to the doctor when you're very sick. Healing on the Sabbath for humanitarian reasons has truthiness.

For me, when a theological belief needs a lot of verses aggregated together, a lot of lead up...in other words when it is a hard sell...that's a red flag. That's not proof it's wrong, but it's a pretty big wham. Mixed signals, you know. Look at the following and tell me if it has truthiness:

Originally Posted by The Fifth Gospel

For I so loved the world that I sent my only son that whosoever does not memorize his name, be baptized and take communion will be damned to eternal hellfire. No excuses, even if it's death after a jailhouse conversion in a Roman prison. If he ain't wet, he don't get.

Please don't tell me that truthiness is not required. How many people do you think you'd win for Christ if the message was "The silence of the trumpet blasts makes you look into the green sky for the fish that swim among the stars...there salvation lies!" Surely any message you must accept to achieve salvation would have to have SOME sense to it, right? It would have to explain some long standing question your old religion...or lack of religion...did not answer, right? Otherwise would you change religions just to give yourself something to do?