Why I Hope Jesus is Wrong - Part II

That's true, but, don't forget God's grace!

Agreed Jimmie; but most people have no problem pointing out God's grace. We too often forget there is still the flip side.

Accountability seems to be a politically incorrect word these days?

No question that awe and reverence of God is necessary to treat Him in a manner He deserves. While Jimmie's comment about grace can't be overlooked in any way and the grace of a loving and mighty God is the essence of salvation through Christ, we as a culture have a tendency of treating God in a very casual and non-committal way. At times I would rather have God be the friendly Santa Claus that many believe He is but then His power, IMO, would be greatly diminished. Mses hid his face from God because he was terrified - not out of unbelief or fear but because his humanity and sin were exposed in the presence of God and Moses was fully aware of all of them at that time. It is a heavy burden that all who teach and preach need to be aware of - not to change the words or the meaning to suit their own views and agenda but rather to attempt to accurately portray the lessons of who and what the Biblical God of Abraham Isaac & Jacob God is, as well the person and the pure deity of Jesus of Nazareth, our messiah. Thanks again for a well-written and timely message, Donald.

Well first Jesus had no part in Revelation as that was written a hundred years or so after he died.

And second as Jesus was a man like any other man why do you think he can't be wrong?

Jimmie, it might be "true" - for you; Donald, for you too. It might seem to be true for a number of others, but numbers of votes don't make it any more right for me.

I could say, there are many other collections of literature to quote from, for whatever purpose. I could say, I understand the motives behind warning against arrogantly using the memory of the intricacies and details of the particular literary work like an intellectual weapon, in order to undermine others; after all, it's how it has been used down the centuries, sometimes more intensely and violently in persuading believers and those who were uncertain to follow, without question, the interpretations of the alleged teaching of an apparent person, or persons in and around the first century.

Should we study and quote, in that case, from ALL ancient works, in seeking our knowledge for today's existence? If that is OK, we have many more medieval books from which to choose.

Then the medieval lifestyle would also have to apply, the lords taking most of the wealth and the land, just because it had been given to them by a king or a duke who stole it anyway, the poor food for the masses, the illness and death in squalour, the non-existence of education, the short life-span of most; it would all have to be taken into account. Of course, that's just in the UK. As always, the US had a different way of looking at things.

Will that exercise of studying all the other books, taking many lifetimes, make us any the wiser, any more knowledgable about how to treat our fellow man, no matter where he lives, whatever system of belief or government, at home or abroad?

How has it done so far, this body of knowledgable words? We have nearly 2000 years to look back on to see if that one group of alleged observations and apparent verbatums has stopped friction, arguements, wars, dictatorships, torture, injustice, illness and poverty.

The collection of books which include your quotes have been around for centuries, in many variations which have been written and re-written, translated and adjusted, then selected by the self-appointed wealthy heirarchy proclaiming that the 'meek shall inherit' something and that 'money is the root of all evil.'

I don't buy it. I simply like to treat everyone with respect. But that's my truth.

Peace.

Interesting responses. I can appreciate the sincerely behind them; however I will quote my pastor and say that anyone can be sincere, but they can also be sincerely incorrect.

As noted by metaphysical believer (and decidedly non-Christian in a traditional sense) Emmet Fox, no one can truly deny that Jesus or Nazareth was the most important person ever in history. Whether you believe His claims or not, Jesus has sparked discussions, often heated and antagonistic, for 2000 years. He is still the most discussed person in every in history - every day. That's Jesus the man, not Jesus Son of God.

From there, we have to look at what has been said - was He what He claimed to be? That's where faith comes in. You don't have to believe it. But then again, you don';t have to believe that sun is still shining on a rainy day, either.

I don't think Donald's purpose in this is to make any claims against Jesus' divinity, although everyone is certainly welcome to believe whatever they wish. But in the end, a standard of truth has to exist. Without that we have anarchy instead of laws. So teh claims of personal truth are sketchy at best.

if you wish to look at the result of personal truth, look at the decay of modern society for the past 40 years. That's the direct result of abandoning Truth in favor of post-modern personal truth.

The claims that the Bible has been incorrectly translated at times is true; however, the Dead Sea Scrolls show that the assertion of complete fabrication is incorrect as well. Thanks to scholars with the Septuagint and the Dead Seas Scrolls for authentication, the language in today's Bible more closely matches the original texts than ever before. Besides the misquoting of the Beatitudes shows a great misunderstanding and cursory attempt to justify one's own position rather than to understand. Just as the Truth CANNOT in and of itself set you free but KNOWING the Truth will (John 8:32); as the right hand not knowing what the left is doing is a GOOD thing a far as Jesus is concerned (Matthew 6:3-4); and that money is not the root of all evil - LOVE OF money is not even the root of ALL evil (1 Timothy 6:10). These are not mistranslations IN the Bible but OF the Bible, so don't blame this misunderstanding on others but face up to your own accountability and lack of adequate study to defend your position. Beside, Jesus gave us the Beatitudes, not some imagined wealthy church - and He was a poor, homeless man - by design (Luke 9:58).

From a Christian perspective, there are things I wish Jesus were wrong about as well. I am well aware that Jesus was NOT wrong, however - and that my attitudes and actions have to change to adapt to His standard, not my own. And in that - ONLY in that - can we find true peace.

Very interesting. Thanks Donald and commenters.

I don't believe Jesus was wrong either; that is why I say wish in my series.

As for Jesus speaking in the book of Revelation; I beg to differ. Of course I could say God and Jesus being the same; something in the old testament would also be valid to say that "I wish Jesus did not say." But I am trying to stay with things Christ is attributed in the Bible as having said. Of course Christ was not on the earth incarnate when he gave to John this book of Revelation. But see from the following for where I am taking my permission to quote Revelation in this series:

Revelation 1
1 The revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave him to show his servants what must soon take place. He made it known by sending his angel to his servant John, 2 who testifies to everything he saw—that is, the word of God and the testimony of Jesus Christ. 3 Blessed is the one who reads the words of this prophecy, and blessed are those who hear it and take to heart what is written in it, because the time is near.

Additionally; for fuller context of the passage in Revelation 22 see following:
16 "I, Jesus, have sent my angel to give you[a] this testimony for the churches. I am the Root and the Offspring of David, and the bright Morning Star."

17 The Spirit and the bride say, "Come!" And let him who hears say, "Come!" Whoever is thirsty, let him come; and whoever wishes, let him take the free gift of the water of life.

18 I warn everyone who hears the words of the prophecy of this book: If anyone adds anything to them, God will add to him the plagues described in this book. 19 And if anyone takes words away from this book of prophecy, God will take away from him his share in the tree of life and in the holy city, which are described in this book.

20 He who testifies to these things says, "Yes, I am coming soon."
Amen. Come, Lord Jesus.

Note that in verse 16 Jesus starts speaking and in verse 20 he concludes speaking and John concludes with "Amen. Come, Lord Jesus."

Joe... what is "IMO"?

Jerome... I am saddened to see that there is no place for "faith" in your position. My faith informs my life, God's grace reforms my actions, and God's Spirit conforms me to God's will (if I am willing to be conformed).

IMO - In my opinion
IMHO - In my humble opinion

Well it is true that Revelation was written almost 100 years after His death. But it was also written a hundred years or so after His resurrection from that death and back to eternal life as well (3 days after His death). For mere man this would be an issue, but Jesus is alive and has been alive since that moment.

Let me reiterate that - Jesus IS NOT dead. He is alive. That coupled with grace is the single most important and basic tenet of Christianity. Because without the resurrection Jesus was just another man - one of thousands that the Romans crucified for various reasons. But Jesus is no mer man. Jesus overcame the grave and the power of death because He is God. He is the God-man, the Savior & Messiah. The Christ of the world.

I understand your faith, Joe, or perhaps your need for faith. It's what happens, people take on a belief and fit everything around it to justify it.

It's powerful to have a focus, something which drives you on. I admire the results of all that energy. My point is, that I hear constantly the repetition of the same phrases which many believers use, the 'Jesus lives' stuff, which, when it comes down to it can only be a poetic use of words, a fantasy which is perpetuated because this 'messiah' chap, the real man - or even men - died quite a few years back; we can guess it was about 2000 years ago, but then the calendars have been rebooted several times, haven't they, minor adjustments, they call it.

Anyway, repeating the same old phrases doesn't do any more than comforting, reinforcing the belief in the phrase; it doesn't make it any the more true. Where is the 'he' who is mentioned. Ah, in the heart of believers, perhaps. Where in the heart? We don't know, but I'm sure a competant surgeon would find 'him' if 'he' was there. But perhaps believers would have an answer for that too; only THEY know where he is, because it's that stuff called 'faith,' that which answers all unanswerable questions when logic fails.

In the end, no matter how many quotes you can use, or fire back and forth at one another, no matter how many contradictions about the collection of books you use for your 'faith,' it doesn't make you a better person. It just makes you appear clever. I've heard it a million times, this academic badminton, the biblical ping-pong; it just becomes a competition like a pub quiz night. Surely the main subject is about how we can get on with one another NOW in order to survive, live well, be happy in what we are doing, be kind to our environment, have a sense of fairness with our fellow man wherever he lives while we can.

Am I the only person who sees things that way?

We can live today as if there is no tomorrow, because tomorrow will be 'today.'

Marianne, it was an ironic statement, a deliberate misquote. Look a bit deeper at what I said.

"Well it is true that Revelation was written almost 100 years after His death. "

I might beg to differ with this dating of when Revelation was written. If John; the apostle wrote it; as I believe he did, John would have had to live to be 120 or 130 years old. I think it more accurate to date the book of Revelation at 80-90 AD, at the latest; which would be roughly 50-60 years after Christ resurrection. John would have been 70-80 then.

"Let me reiterate that - Jesus IS NOT dead. "

I agree totally with this point. I don't know if this is in reply to my point about Jesus not being "incarnate" in my comment? Being alive and being incarnate I think are two different things. We are alive and incarnate (flesh and bodily form) now but this flesh will die. Our spirits will live on to either be with Christ or be preserved for God's judgment. I don't think Christ was in the flesh when he communed with and gave John the book of Revelation? He may have been in his glorified body, I don't know that? My point was that Jesus did say some things to John; whatever form he took and not an angel and not the Holy Spirit (although again Father, Son and Holy Spirit are one and the same, but also separate, another mystery which would take another article to talk about; though I can never do justice to explain). I say this because John seem to be clear throughout Revelation on who was talking to him and it was not always the same being/person/entity/angel/spirit. In the case of my point; it was certainly Jesus that said the words - 60-100 years after his resurrection.

Jerome,

I appreciate your response. You have the ring of truth to some of your statements. And while I'm sure you won't appreciate it I can substantiate every one of those truths with Biblical truth: living one day at a time (Matt. 6:34); being happy with your lot (the entire book of Ecclesiastes); taking care of the environment (it's called stewardship in Genesis); and caring for one's neighbor (the parable of the Good Samaritan comes immediately to mind). The problem is that you fall victim to the fallacy that everyone I've ever heard this argument from does - you believe that faith hast to replace logic, but in that statement you lie to yourself in believing that the logic of a flawed and imperfect human is perfect and without flaws.

Also, everyone has faith - we just don't all share faith in the same ways or the same things. Let me illustrate -

The definition of faith includes science for this reason. Because every hypothesis is a statement of belief based on experience. And every clinical test is an attempt to prove that experience valid and therefore true to the believer.

And what is love but a combination of faith & trust? When someone says they love you, is it not faith and trust that what they are saying is true? Because you can no more prove that empirically than you can what I say about God. And I assume you believe that love exists.

This was a telling statement as well: "Anyway, repeating the same old phrases doesn't do any more than comforting, reinforcing the belief in the phrase; it doesn't make it any the more true." We could say the same things about Newton's Laws, Ohm's Law, etc. Repeating them doesn't make them any more true - nor does it make them any less true. Your refusal to believe that the Bible is true does not diminish its truthfulness at all. It simply shows that like the men who laughed at the Wright Brothers because human flight had already been shows to be impossible, you just refuse to accept something simply because you don't understand or believe it. Nothing more and nothign less. It shows an extreme close mindedness from someone who I'm sure prides himself for being open-minded.

It's not cleverness that drives this. Cleverness is rooted in pride and ego, which is driven by self-interest. My interest is in helping others by spreading the Gospel of Jesus Christ so that all who hear may have the opportunity as I did to change and to be lifted up by this message of hope rather than tech message of fear and defeat that the world offers. Instead I think the competition comes from you and this statement reveals that YOU are th one that has a vested interest in being right despite all evidence to the contrary: "Am I the only person who sees things that way?" Perhaps - and if you are, does that not say something of your view in believing that you are right and everyone else is wrong?

How can you say I'm not a better person than I was? Did you know me then? Do you know me now? You are not qualified to make that statement about anyone but yourself. And since you don't believe its easy to see why and how you are self-admittedly not a better person.

This is not intended to be a contest or competition to prove who's right. But you are so concerned with being right that you can't see the truth for what it is - that people like Donald and and hopefully myself genuinely care about others and out them above our own selves. And that this attitude cannot be accomplished by sheer force of will - it MUST be replaced by a stronger force than human nature. And that force, for lack of any better term, is God.

You speak of how no one can live beyond this life in any literal sense. But my father has been dead for over 20 years and rare is the day that I don;t think about him. I also try to explain who and what he was to my family so that they will have a sense of our shared roots even without having the benefit of knowing him personally. And io that way we keep him alive to some degree even though he died many years ago. And if that is possible for a single person who was only known to a a small collection, how much more alive is Jesus' spirit today in the collective conscience of believers? And note that this is looking at it from your own viewpoint - I truly believe that Jesus is alive in a form that we don't understand yet. Because i have absolutely no reason NOT to. Nothing we know disproves that.

So rather than projecting onto Christians, sir, I recommend that you look at your own life and stop justifying your actions and thoughts. Justification and rationalization are nearly the same. And rationalization is what the mind does in order to support its own frail beliefs.

You quote Jesus without realizing it in your last statement as well: "Therefore keep watch, because you do not know on what day your Lord will come." (Matt 24:42 - read the entirety of Matt 24:36-51 for a better understanding of how this applies. )

In other words, live every day as if it were your last.

"In the end, no matter how many quotes you can use, or fire back and forth at one another, no matter how many contradictions about the collection of books you use for your 'faith,' it doesn't make you a better person. It just makes you appear clever."

In speaking of ironical statements; this one is very ironical.

The first irony is that the book of faith we use; the Bible does not make us better people. This Bible is like a microscope that points out our flaws; in it, it says we all have sinned, we are all wicked, we all fall short of God's glory; we can never meet God's requirement for perfection. The Bible point out these flaws so we can realize our need for salvation through Jesus Christ. Having Christ does not make us better people either; but he is the key, the way, the golden ticket, the door; the high priest, etc. that will even allow us to approach God. It is not with a sense of pride that I say I am a Christian; it is with a sense of recognition of my need and a thankfulness that God rather than destroy me, chose to adopt me as one of his sons. I am not better, pure, righteous, good, rich; I have no reason to be proud; except of my famous saviour and God who saves me from all of that. And rather than live in the dirt and mire; I do need to recognize he has forgiven me and try to live better. Not because I am better and the price of admission is to be better; but because of whose son I am and to make him proud of me and pleased with me. I am never going to be good enough; but my Father is; and my Saviour is and that makes me good enough. And it makes anybody else good enough that he calls them the elect, the saints, his children, his sons and daughters. We have a rich heir in God; and like rich kids, we are not any better than others but unlike rich kids, we can invite you to be a part of the family and have the same inheritance we have.

The other ironical statement is that it makes you appear clever. To who? The apostle Paul said the wisdom of God is foolishness to those in the world. Most people that are not in the family look at these discussions as foolishness.

I will say that Christians do sometimes also debate minutiae that sometimes gets heated and seems (and often is petty). We need to be careful of this, especially when in open forums in which we are trying to win those that are not in the family.

I must admit I like to appear as clever and intelligent as the next person. But it is far more important to be meek and gentle, loving and caring, winning and winsome, than it is to make sure your point is taken.

"Yesterday we thought we knew such a lot. Today we know it all. Tomorrow we'll see we knew nothing of any consequence."

Jerome,

I don't know who you're quoting, but that's called learning and growth. But that has a perspective that shows us we learn what we allow ourselves to learn. And when we automatically exclude something as a matter of bias or prejudice we automatically reduce what we are able to learn exponentially. There is much to learn from the past - much tat we in our arrogance have discarded as useless.

"There is a principle which is a bar against all information, which is proof against all arguments and which cannot fail to keep a man in everlasting ignorance - that principle is contempt prior to investigation."
- William Paley

"Those who cannot learn from history are doomed to repeat it."
"The wisest mind has something yet to learn."
- George Santayana

Thank you for your kind reply, Joe. It gave me a sense of your understanding of my other replies.
However, buried in Donald's piece and his subsequent remarks (and some of mine) is the idea that quoting from biblical texts in a kind of backing up of one's ideas is questionable.
I neither quoted from any biblical, religious, spiritual, science-fantasy, philosophical, ethical, non-fictional or fictional text.
To some, the mere quoting of something gives it some authenticity, reliability, plausibility and, ulitmately, the sense of authority.

I just happened to put quote marks on my own thoughts. Perhaps you might see that your own wisdom is the one to trust, not the wisdom purveyed by others in repeated speeches, diatribes, epigrams and in elderly tomes.

Enjoy the journey to Peace.

I like your quote jerome.

But I don't agree that using a text to back one's ideas as questionable. Any research paper I have ever done in college and any thesis I know of requires use of other sources to back their thesis.

What is questionable at times is motive. If we are we trying to appear superior and vaunted up in our knowledge, this is a poor motive. To do anything to win your point is a bad motive.

What also is questionable is taking something out of context to make your point. A good example of this is the often heard complaint of all the contradictions in the Bible. If you ask the person what contradiction they have in mind, most don't have one because they are just parroting this as a cop-out to look at the wisdom. However, of those contradictions, they can usually be expained in context either of the chapters they are in or in scope of the entire Bible.

As to sources of wisdom; I think the Bible, which I believe is God's inspired word given to men, is the ultimate source of wisdom. It is said to be the living word:

Hebrews 4.12 - For the word of God is living and active. Sharper than any double-edged sword, it penetrates even to dividing soul and spirit, joints and marrow; it judges the thoughts and attitudes of the heart.

Ultimately the decision and one of the legs of faith is the inspiration and inerrancy of the Bible. Either you believe it is inspired by God and also somehow through all the centuries of interpretations and preservation is inerrant. Or you do not.

And ultimately, and this is really the ultimate purpose of this series, you believe Jesus Christ is who he said he is and that he did what he said he would do and will do what he promised. That is that he lived a perfect life, that he died for each person so that they can have a repaired relationship with God, that he rose from the dead, and that he is going to return and those that accepted his reparation will be with him and God in heaven. Those that reject this will be judged by the God that they rejected.

If people don't believe Jesus and God's work the following from 1 Corinthians 1 is applicable:

18 For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing, but to us who are being saved it is the power of God. 19 For it is written:
"I will destroy the wisdom of the wise;
the intelligence of the intelligent I will frustrate."[c]
20 Where is the wise man? Where is the scholar? Where is the philosopher of this age? Has not God made foolish the wisdom of the world? 21 For since in the wisdom of God the world through its wisdom did not know him, God was pleased through the foolishness of what was preached to save those who believe. 22 Jews demand miraculous signs and Greeks look for wisdom, 23 but we preach Christ crucified: a stumbling block to Jews and foolishness to Gentiles, 24 but to those whom God has called, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God. 25 For the foolishness of God is wiser than man's wisdom, and the weakness of God is stronger than man's strength.

26 Brothers, think of what you were when you were called. Not many of you were wise by human standards; not many were influential; not many were of noble birth. 27 But God chose the foolish things of the world to shame the wise; God chose the weak things of the world to shame the strong. 28 He chose the lowly things of this world and the despised things—and the things that are not—to nullify the things that are, 29 so that no one may boast before him. 30 It is because of him that you are in Christ Jesus, who has become for us wisdom from God—that is, our righteousness, holiness and redemption. 31 Therefore, as it is written: "Let him who boasts boast in the Lord."[d]

I especially like that last verse. My only boast to wisdom is in the Lord and any wisdom that he gives me.

This is my last comment here. Your brilliant and very long reply above, for all its trying to be comprehensive, has contradictions. Many believers of the kind you describe for yourself are very good at quoting what they, and, by implication, others, should hold true. We are only told these beliefs, by others, our parents, our peers, our friends with whom we wish to please. Some even decide to study the great collection of books and become eager to call from memory the ideal verses.
Yes, academics like to use quotes, because we are expected to do so in universities in order to show we have done the research. Belief in a set of values is based on our own inner wishes, thoughts, philosophy, loves, even hates, instincts, what gives us comfort. Anything else would seem to be placatory.
We, no, I correct myself, I, cannot believe, truly believe in a set of historic anecdotes, as sincere as they may have been when they were written, some if not many, based on heresay, translation, legends, stories and suppositions...and come up with a style of life, a set of values for my today. There are some social values perpetrated in it, but they can be accepted from any basic religious doctrine which includes treating your fellow man with respect.
Moreover, in order to get a balanced view, I would have to spend years, no, centuries, reading all the words of other religious, intellectual, philosophical, psychological and spiritual wise people. Even then, I would not know what to know or believe for myself; I would be so full of knowledge, of the words and experiences of others, I would hardly recognise the real me.
I believe in me, the me who has come to the present through many of my own experiences of life, emotional and physical. I am content to know that I shall never know it all, that I am strong enough to disagree with others when my instinct tells me something is wrong. I have learnt to dislike injustice, to defend those more vulnerable than me and to dislike hypocrisy. I am compassionate to people I know and meet and I feel that they are the same towards me.
My wisdom is home grown. I have followed my own path, dance to the beat of my own drum.

"My wisdom is home grown. I have followed my own path, dance to the beat of my own drum. "

You and Frank Sinatra :)

"As for me and my house; we will serve the Lord" - book of Joshua.

One last note on this matter from my perspective. I appreciate your response tome Jerome, and I do attempt to be kind in my notes while attempting to make a point. I am glad that you and I have come to a mutual respect and understanding of our views.

One thing I would like to note, however, is that not all of us accept what is handed down from previous generations. I personally left the version of Christianity I was brought up with for a number of reasons - primarily because questions were forbidden. God does not forbid questions - humans and human institutions do when they cannot adequately answer them. That's my experience.

For myself, I came back from a 2 decade wandering of agnosticism and atheism because my questions eventually got answered to my satisfaction. Not by others or by the Bible itself, but through personal experience and a relationship with the god of my understanding. Time brought me to a place where I was then able to comprehend some of the spiritual meaning of the Bible and it also made sense to me when viewed from a spiritual and not carnal perspective. I am not criticizing you- hopefully we have established this in what I have written prior to the post. I am simply sharing my own experience. many are parrots who have little understanding of what they say. But for those I pray that their spiritual awakening will be fruitful when it finally arrives. For others, I simply pray that their spiritual awakening occur.

I cannot trust my own wisdom in and of itself because I am by nature selfish and critical of others and even more so of myself. Having learned that powerful and valuable lesson about myself, I found that I was unable to change that about myself. It wasn't until I came to grips with God that my life changed from a negative image to a positive and productive life based on the altruism I find in Jesus. I care little of whether that is politically correct or matches the agenda of Bible thumpers. I care only for my relationship with God and as a direct extension of that , of my relationship with others and the world around me.

I understand your view and respectfully disagree based on my own experiences and not those of a book without any other basis. It's only because I have this experience that I can trust the Bible - because it matches my own experience and that validates it for my personal relationships. In the mean time, I thank you for an enlightening interchange (hopefully in both directions) and I pray that you will come to know the peace I know and have only found from my relationship with the Christ. Take care and my God richly bless you.

Seems like I missed an interesting discussion back in the fall.