I go to church, but can't help beleiving that it is much more likely that Jesus was a mere mortal......

[northerner]

Just seems more liekly to me imo.

I do enjoy gping to church, I like the people, I like the morals in will instill into my ds who enjoys Sunday School, I like the whole church ethos. Just think Jesus was a mortal man like any other who just happened to preach goodness.

With this in mind, is there still a place for me in a place of worship?

Just looking for opinions, lets not get heated

soph28: It sounds weird to me because using words about friendship etc. to describe my spiritual life are just meaningless to me. They don't speak to me at all. It sounds very odd to me. It is not the way I express my faith, because it is the not the way I feel about my faith.

nearlythree i totally understand where you're coming from, all I mean is that I know Jesus is Divine otherwise I wouldn't be able to relate to him in the way I (and many other people all around the world) do all the time.

The thing is it's not all about who Jesus WAS, it's about who he IS. He is still doing radical things in people's lives all the time.

MP, how do you express your faith and how do you feel about your faith? you don't have to answer

i have deep rooted antipathy to the evangelical and charismatic movements as i have experienced them in this country for many reasons, the main one being that there seems to be little room for doubt, and without doubt there is no faith.

i also particularly dislike that everything is jesus addressed rather than seeing jesus as a conduit to god.

N3 - that is SO spooky. I quoted that exact same piece from Paul, at my tutorial the other day! Its funny, my tutor and I were in agreement, that there are somethings that to a certain extent "just don't matter", because whether we believe them or not, won't alter the fact whether they are true or not (as you say, such as the virgin birth, even the divinity of Jesus!). Now for me, if I didn't believe in the elements expressed in the Creed, firstly, I couldn't do what I'm doing, and secondly, I couldn't say the creed with any conviction. My tutor, on the other hand is a very learned man, retired reader of several decades experience and a professor to boot - and he doubts a number of things in the creed.
But we both believe in God, and we both believe in the essential being "love the Lord your God... and your neighbour as yourself".
Now (I think) we struggled to get across to the other 2 why we thought it didn't matter. I couldn't explain it totally either, because the things that don't matter, matter to me!
Am I making sense? Probably not. But essentially, it comes down to the "seeing through a glass darkly"

but sophable if Jesus IS God (and that is my beleif) then I am quite OK to address things to Him.

He did say 'Iam am the way, the truth and the life, no-one comes to the father but through me' - so maybe that is a conduit to God.

northerner - I remember once reading about a movement called something like the 'Sea of faith' or @tide of faith'. It was founded by Anglican Clergy who had lost their faith in God as a supreme entity, didn't believe in virgin birth etc. But they felt it important to gather together in an act of 'worship' giving thanks for what we have - albeit not given by God. To appreciate & practise 'Christian' values.
Maybe that would help - if it exists.

John Spong is involved with Sea of Faith. Haven't checked them out myself but they definitely exist.

Slighly off the point here, but it was extremely dangerous to be a follower of 'The Way' (as it was called when Jesus was alive and immediately after his death). Most of the early christians ended up dying in very nasty ways!

It's still like that in many parts of the world. I've been in countries where people are imprisoned for practising christianity. I've had to watch my own back (and my words). It might be 'safe' here in the UK but globally that it is not the case.

Like N3 said, we have this image of Jesus meek and mild, but the reality is that he said and did very subvertive and disturbing things. Most people didn't like it - and most people still don't. Not that I deliberately want to cause a big ruckus, but in this country our perspective of christianity (and christ) has been diluted by centuries of in-fighting and political manoueverings (sp????)

As someone said below, Jesus was a radical, who spoke the truth sometimes gently and sometimes ruthlessly. He didn't pander to the powers-that-be and he wasn't afraid to befriend the outcasts. Some things he said were lovely and tender, others were damning, depending on who he was talking to. And I also believe that he is still doing radical things today, and I am honoured to be one of his gang .

Anyway I really must go to work!!!!

"Most of the early christians ended up dying in very nasty ways! "

I would take issue with that point (though not with the rest of your post, Texasrose) - I just don't think our historical knowledge of the period is good enough to permit us to make definite statements like that. (We know about a few martyrs, we don't know how many early Christians there were and what happened to them.)

OK this is what I can remember from my lectures is all, but fwiw Christians and Jews lived relatively happily alongside each other, christianity was a sect of Judaism (My Prof refers to it at this point as 'The Jesus Cult') and Christianity as such came later, and with it danger as it spread.

Ah, now according to SOME Theologians Christianity as distinct came with paul, because that's when Gentiles started to be recruiyted and the firct council held that the Jew laws did not need to be followed.

Jewish antipathy to Jesus supposed to represent the loss of the Jewish covenant with God, which is represented in the selection of baracus to be saved.

Mind, I only do the theory. And then I am a beginner.

The existence of the early Jewish church (said to be led by Jesus' brother) is kept quiet in many church circles. It really challenges so much of what we believe... what if that church had survived instad of the Pauline church? Presumably its followers knew Jesus (or knew those who had known him) personally.

The danger came to the Pauline church from the Romans of course.

PeachyClair, what are you studying?

Message withdrawn

I didn't say anything about Pauline oppression. Nor did I say that the two churches were rivals, although I think they were very different. I do think that in recent history the existence of the Jewish church has been swept under the carpet - certainly it isn't mentioned in any church I've been to - and I do also think that the understanding of who Jesus was would be very different had it been the Jewish church that survived and not the Pauline one.

nearlythree, (world) religions and philosophy- so this year Western religions (Christianity atm- start the Paul essay research tomorrow LOL), Islamis perspectives, Jainism, Eastern Thought (Buddhism) plus Ethics

A good friend is doing Messianic Judaism for his dissertation next year, about as close as you can get to a Jewish Church really- Jews who accept that Jesus was the Messiah

I think you have to go back to the beginning and start afresh with a clear mind. Read what you can on Jesus and most of all read the New Testament.

There is no doubt that Jesus as a man existed. There is no doubt that his words were very very wise - I read the New Testament time and again and he always seems ready with an answer for everything! He astounds the teachers and did do from a young age - there is no doubt at all that he is truly a remarkable man.

What you have to remember is that he was born a Carpenter's son, he would not have had a formal education as he would be expected to follow his father into carpentry. So how did he learn to read and write? Where did his extraordinary knowledge of the Scriptures come from?

Then there are his claims, as absurd as they would have sounded back then. The Jews were waiting for their Messiah, but they were waiting on a warrior figure who would led a revolution against the Romans. Yet Jesus was the opposite, his message was peace not war. He knew the risks he took, he didn't set out for fame or glory - so why did he do it? Why did he preach his message knowing that the Jews would react against him, knowing that his life would be in danger? What was in it for him? Was he deluded? His teachings certainly don't sound deluded, they sound intelligent, well reasoned and credible.

Then there are his friends, the apostles. What did they gain by all of this? Once Jesus had been crucified they could have left it at that, preached about him for a while and then disappeared. But they didn't, they were adament that he rose again. They put their lives at stake once more by preaching his resurrection. Not one of them took back his account, not even when being killed did they denounce Jesus.

To me, this is enough reasoned argument to prove that Jesus was someone very very different. I find no grounds to disbelieve his claims or those of his disciples. Also, and this is the big bit I suppose, where faith comes into play, I believe in my heart that he was who he said he was.

Well said Rhubarb.

I most definitely agree with you, Rhubarb, that Jesus lived. Any attempt to say otherwise looks silly.

But...there is no reason to presuppose that just because Jesus was the son of a carpenter he would have had no education. For example, Geza Vermes in his book 'The Changing Face of Jesus' makes it clear that manual work and religious learning were often combined at this time.

What exactly did Jesus claim for himself? There are many modern scholars who believe Jesus did not see himself as the Messiah, and who think that when he appears to claim this for himself it has been added. For example, you can look at the work of the Jesus Seminar (I can't remember how many theologians work with it but I am sure they run into three figures) - their recent book The Five Gospels (they include Thomas) has in red the words they have agreed by consensus were actually spoken by Jesus, and those which have come from the experience and beliefs of others. So according to them we lose the whole of John's beautiful Gospel , as well as quite a bit of the Synoptics.

So what was in it for Jesus? There is no doubt God was with him. His mission was to teach us how to live. We have turned it into how to get to heaven. I think he knew he would die, after all he was a friend and (for a while) disciple of John the Baptist. He entered his ministry knowing it would almost certainly cost him his life but with no knowledge of Easter. Other people have done the same, often following Jesus' own teaching and example - Martin Luther King or Ghandi are just two.

What happened to make the apostles gain their courage? I don't know. Something happened. That is all I know, and is enough for me right now.

Rhubarb, I too believe Jesus was unique, and following him is the only way to live. Some of what I have said above I believe, some of it is stuff I am still working through, some is the opinion of others on which I have no real view. I so wanted to believe in my heart forever but my head wouldn't let it. My heart knows that I can experience Jesus now, in some way I can't define. But I can't ignore what for me is compelling evidence that the Gospels do not give us a true picture and that they have been altered and added to in order to get particular theological povs across. Maybe one day my faith will come full-circle and I will again be able to recite the words of the Creed and mean them (I think I would be a lot happier). For now though there is too much doubt - but then this different Jesus is so much more than our churches have allowed him to be.

I'm not religious at all myself - because I can't believe in God, though I have always felt a lot of affinity for Jesus teaching. Interesting that no-one on this thread has mentioned Islam. Muslims believe Jesus was mortal but they lay great store by his teaching - believing him to be the 4th of 5 prophets (Noah, Abraham, Moses, Jesus and then Mohammed).

peachyclair - meant to say - that sounds so interesting, but what an undertaking!!

Message withdrawn

They DO lay great store by Jesus' teachings, firstly because they believe everything Jesus taught was correct; it was the records after that were corrupted. Also, becasue the New testament is mentioned in the Qur'an and its followers as people of the book- sahrers of the same Abrahamic faith. The notion of the Muslims going round trying to covert / kill all Christians simply isn't trrue, they had to pay taxes and adopt a secondary (Dimi) status buta s People Of The Book they were accepted.

Even the extent to which the book has been corrupted is the subject of huge deabte amnongst Scholars, ranging from totally to only in parts (the main part would- totally my theory- be Paul and the stuff on the Messianic Concept as that goes against the Muslim notion of the Prophet).

What I wrote the other day BTW was mainly right, except that apparently whilst Paul was indeed the instigator of The Law (Judaism) as separate to christinaity, James (brother of Jesus) continued his work amongst the Jews and was also one oof the Pillars mentioned in the Bible. The catalyst for the physical split was the Sack of Jerusalem, when all the commnities neded rebuilding and the status quo was literally burned down.

This thread is excellent, not only coz it seems to folow my lesson plan, it really helpws with revision LOL

Message withdrawn

CS Lewis wrote about this. HE said you have to decide about Christ - Either he was bad - trying to deceive people into following him - in which case, aren't his teachings corrupt. Or he was mad - deluded - in which case arent his teachingds also deluded. OR, he was who he said he was, the Son of God, and all that he said is true.

FWIW, I think yes, He was (is) the Son of God. Who else would have chosen to die for what he said? Jesus was given a lot of ways our, but crucifixion was what he chose - for all of us.

Can I recommend a book which will explain it more than I ever can? - Josh McDowell's 'Evidence that demands a verdict' - he was an athiest looking to disprove Jesus when he started writing the book, but he ended up as Christain after he had read the evidence (he was a lawyer).

I really do think that Jesus is (was) God - and think this is central to what I believe.

But there have been many hundreds of "mere mortals" who have died for their beliefs, or for the benefit of others. The crucifixion alone is not evidence of divinity. It is evidence of bravery and integrity, but those are human qualities.