From: ksand@apple.com (Kent Sandvik )
Subject: Re: Is Jesus a prophet?
Date: Sat, 19 Dec 1992 23:05:03 GMT
Organization: (Evil Eye Creature from Mars, Inc.)
Followup-To: talk.religion.misc

In article <78598@hydra.gatech.EDU>, rpitts@emperor.gatech.edu (Richard
Pitts) wrote:
> In article <ksand-161292201520@wintermute.apple.com> ksand@apple.com (Kent Sandvik ) writes:
> |If he was older than Abraham he could have been Adam, Seth, or
> |something else. It does not logically imply that he's a God. Same
 
> True, but if he was God (the Ancient of Days) then he would be older
> than Adam and Seth and this passage would still hold.

If, but we don't know if this is the case or not, based on the cite.
In other words as long as we don't have enough data to make a final
judgement, why should we then try to guess? The cite just tells us
that he's older than Abraham.


> |with the concept 'son of God', 'son of God' does not automatically
> |imply that he is God. Actually the other way around, why couldn't

> Compare that to this:
> 
>     John 5:18 (NIV)   For this reason the Jews tried all the harder 
>     to kill him; not only was he breaking the Sabbath, but he was 
>     even calling God his own Father, making himself equal with God. 

I agree that this would imply that indirectly he wanted to justify
himself on equal terms with God. However, there are two problems with
this cite:
1. Note the tone of the passage, someone is telling this, not Jesus
himself. And remember the cites where he does not *want* to state
this fact himself. In other words aren't we dealing with hearsaying?
2. If one doctrine states that calling himself Son of God implies
he is God, but another doctrnine states that this is just a courtesy
saying, we could even just deal with a misunderstanding between
the conservative Jews and Jesus. Imagine, all started with a
misunderstanding :-).

I could go on, but note that Jesus is not the only one that has been
named 'son of God'. If you analysis is correct, we had many other
Jesus beings walking around in ancient Jerusalem!
 
> |he say that :"Look here, I'm really God, but just now I'm a man
> |in an human form, and the third part is the holy ghost, and when
> |I'm back in heaven I'm once again part of the three parts that constitute
> |God". All this was *never* said by Jesus, instead by Paul and the
> |followers that wanted to create a nice religion.
> 
> Didn't Jesus say that he was going back to the Father and they they
> would send ANOTHER comforter - seems like there were three and Jesus
> did tell us what was going on.

So he didn't tell us the whole truth. Interesting.

> |A lot of the issues would not be present if Jesus would have 
> |said things about the doctrines. As long as this is not the case,
> |you will always find people questioning why all this was added
> |later.

> Could it be that these doctrines become clearer to those who believe,
> for Jesus said he and the Father would come and make his home with
> those who believe AND he said that the Holy Spirit would be in us
> and guide us in all truth.  However, the Holy Spirit is convicting
> those without of sin, righteousness and judgment.

And could it be that the message was muddy and not clear because
the message was never presented by Jesus himself? It seems every time
we end up in this part of the conversation, the "Holy Spirit" becomes
the deux ex machina solution that saves Christian doctrines from
common sense judgments...

You know, if Christianity would have been far better constructed,
I would have been a Christian, as well as most of those who
are critical about Christianity. In other words, a far better
design by an omnipotent being would have solved most of the problems
of Christianity.

> |I guess responsibility includes to let people walk into abortion
> |clinics without disturbing their way.

> Could it be said that being responsible is loving someone so much that 
> you didn't want them to be hurt or hurt themselves ?

You should take the next step and love them so much so the other part
could act independently, and be personally responsible for their actions.
In other words the same notion Jesus had about humans and sins.

Kent
-------------------
Kent Sandvik (UUCP: ....!apple!ksand; INTERNET: ksand@apple.com)
DISCLAIMER: Private activities on the Net.		
"Don't just do something!  Stand there!"  -- Mystery Science Theater 3000
Xref: sparky talk.religion.misc:24198 alt.pagan:14379