You're right... John has the lowest number of miracles, though it does include a few not mentioned in the other gospels.
I'm referring mainly to how the miracles are described (the shift from "the miracles occurred because the person being healed had faith", generally, to "they believed because of his miracles") and the claims of actual divinity (as opposed to inferences) which don't show up until the Gospel of John.
My reference to James wasn't about what the epistle was for, but how it referred to the legend of the Christ. These are the things that lead me to believe that Jesus was a real person, a real teacher who developed a following, and that after his death the followers continued to expand on his legend until he went from "empowered by God" to actually being God. It's not a conspiracy theory, it's actual myth-building... legends pop up for various reasons, and are winnowed back down into a congruent canon. That's why I gave the example of the Mormons, who went through the same process-- but in a time when record-keeping was better, and we can see the manipulation over time, as it occured. I am proposing that a similar thing happened with the early Christian church.
I'm referring mainly to how the miracles are described (the shift from "the miracles occurred because the person being healed had faith", generally, to "they believed because of his miracles") and the claims of actual divinity (as opposed to inferences) which don't show up until the Gospel of John.
My reference to James wasn't about what the epistle was for, but how it referred to the legend of the Christ. These are the things that lead me to believe that Jesus was a real person, a real teacher who developed a following, and that after his death the followers continued to expand on his legend until he went from "empowered by God" to actually being God. It's not a conspiracy theory, it's actual myth-building... legends pop up for various reasons, and are winnowed back down into a congruent canon. That's why I gave the example of the Mormons, who went through the same process-- but in a time when record-keeping was better, and we can see the manipulation over time, as it occured. I am proposing that a similar thing happened with the early Christian church.
A Christian told me: if you were saved you cant lose your salvation. you're sealed with the Holy Ghost
I replied: Can I refuse? Because I find the entire concept of vicarious blood sacrifice atonement to be morally abhorrent, the concept of holding flawed creatures permanently accountable for social misbehaviors and thought crimes to be morally abhorrent, and the concept of calling something "free" when it comes with the strings of subjugation and obedience perhaps the most morally abhorrent of all... and that's without even going into the history of justifying genocide, slavery, rape, misogyny, religious intolerance, and suppression of free speech which has been attributed by your own scriptures to your deity. I want a refund. I would burn happily rather than serve the monster you profess to love.
I replied: Can I refuse? Because I find the entire concept of vicarious blood sacrifice atonement to be morally abhorrent, the concept of holding flawed creatures permanently accountable for social misbehaviors and thought crimes to be morally abhorrent, and the concept of calling something "free" when it comes with the strings of subjugation and obedience perhaps the most morally abhorrent of all... and that's without even going into the history of justifying genocide, slavery, rape, misogyny, religious intolerance, and suppression of free speech which has been attributed by your own scriptures to your deity. I want a refund. I would burn happily rather than serve the monster you profess to love.
