[Vision2020] The Divinity of Christ

Sun Jan 2 07:04:36 PST 2005

Ms. Opyr aka Paris,

You wrote, "If we could reduce all religious commandments down to 'love one another,' I have no doubt that this would be a better world."

Amen. Let's do it.

The only problem is, it is impossible. I have no data to back this up, but I would speculate that religious aggression tops the "Why can't we all just get along?" list. The commandment you cited is the second greatest commandment according to Jesus. The first greatest being, "YOU SHALL LOVE THE LORD YOUR GOD WITH ALL YOUR HEART, AND WITH ALL YOUR SOUL, AND WITH ALL YOUR MIND. This is the great and foremost commandment." Matthew 22:37-38

Mankind will not reconcile with one another until they have reconciled with their God.

Ron Smith
________________________________

From: vision2020-bounces at moscow.com on behalf of Joan Opyr
Sent: Sun 1/2/2005 12:10 AM
To: Vision2020 Moscow
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] The Divinity of Christ

Hi Ron,

I'm a fan of Flavius Josephus.  In fact, I have a page of his work (from a disassembled medieval manuscript) framed and hanging on my wall.  I collect medieval manuscript pages -- I have a whole two of them.  Wish I had more, but they're expensive and I'm no Paris Hilton.  Although it has been said that we do look alike.  Ha!

The problem with your translation, below, is the use of the definite article before the word messiah.  That wouldn't have been in the original text, just as it wasn't in the original Greek gospels of Matthew, Mark, or Luke.  Biblical Greek doesn't do definite articles.  So in Josephus, as in the synoptic gospels, Jesus was "messiah," not "the messiah."  Messiah is the Hebrew word for anointed -- christos is the Greek word -- and what it meant to an early Jewish audience, i.e., the first followers of Jesus, was that they believed him to be the king of Israel; the king of the Jews.  It's not until you get to John -- oh, that troublesome John -- that words like messiah and christos begin to mean something more than wise, wonderful, or even superhuman; they begin to mean direct one-to-one correspondence with God.  

(BTW, inspired by you, I re-read John earlier this evening, and it's in this gospel and this gospel alone that Jesus raises Lazarus from the dead.  In all of the other gospels, Jesus' last public act, the one that leads directly to his crucifixion, is to throw the money-changers from the temple.  In John, his last public act is to raise Lazarus from the dead, and that's what gets him trouble.  Very interesting; to me, anyway.)  

I don't deny that Jesus existed, though there's no contemporary historical proof that he did, and Pontius Pilate apparently didn't consider him of enough interest to record an account for Rome of his trial and crucifixion.  I also don't deny his wisdom, as evidenced in many of the teachings attributed to him, or his near-universal importance over the last twenty-one centuries.  If we could reduce all religious commandments down to "love one another," I have no doubt that this would be a better world.  

And if that sounds corny or cheesy or even conciliatory, you can blame it on the fact that I *do* know who Lawrence Welk is -- and I love him!  Those bubbles!  That champagne lady!  That damned Irish tenor from hell, Joe Feeny, curse him for the evil toupeed leprechaun he was.  How many times did he slaughter Danny Boy?  I lost count at about 72.

Wunnerful, wunnerful,
Joan Opyr/Auntie Establishment   

	----- Original Message -----
	From: Ron Smith
	Sent: Friday, December 31, 2004 2:21 PM
	To: vision2020 at moscow.com
	Subject: RE: [Vision2020] The Divinity of Christ

	What do you think about the writings of the first century Jewish historian Flavius Josephus?

	"About this time there lived Jesus, a wise man, if indeed one ought to call him a man.  For he was one who performed surprising deeds and was a teacher of such people as accept the truth gladly. He won over many Jews and many of the Greeks. He was the Messiah. And when, upon the accusation of the principal men among us, Pilate had condemned him to a cross, those who had  first come to love him did not cease.  He appeared to them spending a third day restored to life, for the prophets of God had foretold these things and a thousand other marvels about him.  And the tribe of the Christians, so called after him, has still to this day not disappeared. 

	                                - Jewish Antiquities, 18.3.3 §63 "

	Happy New year to you as well, Ms Opyr.

	Ron Smith/Billie the Goat

	P.S. Who is Lawrence Welk? =)

________________________________

	From: vision2020-bounces at moscow.com on behalf of Joan Opyr
	Sent: Fri 12/31/2004 1:36 PM
	To: Vision2020 Moscow
	Subject: Re: [Vision2020] The Divinity of Christ

	I think you'll find, Mr. Smith, that you are reading the first three gospels (as many Christians do) in light of the last, John.  It is John that makes the direct claim that Jesus and God are one and the same.  The others use the terms messiah, lord, and son of God, but the direct correspondence/equality between God and Jesus is asserted only in John.  Throughout the first three gospels, what we find is Jesus praying to God for faith and aid; we don't find him praying to himself.  Far from being fallacious, my claims are based on simple textual fact.  The problem here is that you're reading backwards, beginning with John and interpreting the gospels that came before it in light of John's claims.   

	All four gospels sing loudly and in unison the same tune: "Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the Living God."

	Well, no.  Let's not get confused here.  "Jesus is the Christ, the Son of the living God," is not the same as saying that "Jesus is God," as John does.  There's plenty of textual scholarship to back this up, but I fear it would be a waste of time to attach an annotated bibliography to this message.  If you believe as Dale believes, you wouldn't read it -- too many women scholars.  Nonetheless, if you're interested, let me know.

	You need to make up your mind. Do all four of the gospels all speak to the divinity of Jesus or just John?
	Again, this has been my point from the beginning of all this. I have sought to point out your inconsistencies with regard to statements you made about the New Testament. The fact that I deem these texts holy is irrelevant to this discussion. You have made false statements about these texts and all I have been doing is critisizing those false statements.

	I have made up my mind, and no, they don't all speak to the divinity of Jesus.  Some speak to Jesus' status as teacher and prophet; some as messiah; some as Christ; and John makes the final leap and tells us that Jesus was God come to earth as man.  When I say that the four canonical gospels have one purpose and one purpose only (which is why they were chosen for the canon while other gospels, like Thomas, were rejected), and that purpose is to spread faith in Jesus as messiah, as lord, and as Christ, these claims are not synonymous with the claim that Jesus is God.  Only by reading backwards from John (see above) do you get that specific correlation.

	This is so laughable and bursting with contradiction. I say Christ is God. You say He is not. Christ being God is the cornerstone of my faith. By you saying He is not God, you are saying my faith is wrong. Don't feel bad about it. We can't all be right. That would be silly.

	The world is bursting with contradiction, Mr. Smith.  Get used to it.  You say that Jesus is God, and I say that I don't believe he is.  I point out to you some contradictions in the texts on which you base your claims, but I fail to see how that takes a sledgehammer to the cornerstone of your faith.  What do you care what I think?  Dale Courtney says that I'm an atheist (which is where this argument started, if you'll remember), and I say that my God, the God of the Jews, is the foundation, history, and source of your own faith, so even you should understand that I am not an atheist.  In response, you give me John 20:23, to wit, he who doesn't have the son, doesn't have the father.  >From my point of view as a practicing Jew, that's a load of hooey.  It also fails to define the word atheist.

	Now, finally, you say that we can't all be right.  How the devil would you know?  Are you reading backward from the Gospel of John or the Gospel of Ron?  I have to wonder because it seems to me that in your cosmos, God can be confined to four gospels, a few letters from Paul, and the five points of Calvin's Institutes.  That doesn't work for me.  In fact, it seems to me much more likely that God is so infinite that no single human system can contain or comprehend him/her.  We might need many systems, and each and every one might have some small grasp on a corner of the truth.  Though I am in my personal practice a Jew, philosophically, I'm a Unitarian-Universalist.  So there you have it -- my deep dark secret.  Enjoy.

	And that's it for me.  Really and truly, this time.  I wish you a happy New Year, Billy the Goat, and one filled with l'hakshot, fearless questioning.  

	Goodnight, sweetheart, 
	And pleasant dreams to you.
	Here's a wish and a prayer
	That every dream comes true.
	And now 'till we meet again,
	Adios.  Au revoir.  Auf weidersehn.  
	Goodnight!

	Joan Opyr/Auntie Establishment

	PS: For some reason, I woke up with the Lawrence Welk theme song playing in my head.  My heavenly reward or a punishment for tormenting Ron?  You be the judge.     

________________________________

	Get more from the Web. FREE MSN Explorer download : http://explorer.msn.com <http://explorer.msn.com/> 

	_____________________________________________________
	List services made available by First Step Internet, 
	serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.   
	               http://www.fsr.net                       
	          mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
	/////////////////////////////////////////////////////

________________________________

Get more from the Web. FREE MSN Explorer download : http://explorer.msn.com

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20050102/2cfeec9c/attachment-0001.htm