RE: Is Jesus the son of God?
December 20, 2014 at 1:06 pm
(This post was last modified: December 20, 2014 at 1:07 pm by Free.)
(December 20, 2014 at 12:53 pm)whateverist Wrote:(December 20, 2014 at 11:47 am)Brucer Wrote: I don't subscribe to the typical Christian "fire and brimstone" doctrine whatsoever.
Actually, that's "whateverist", but I hear you. Go on.
(December 20, 2014 at 11:47 am)Brucer Wrote: There is a difference between following the teachings of Jesus and following church doctrine. They are completely exclusive.
I like where you're going with this. I'd like to go one step further in the same direction. Why accept the church's book? Is there really any reason to think the bible is the literal, revealed word of God? Nope. Why not just follow Jesus but toss the bible?
The teachings of Jesus pre-existed the church's book. And for the most part, I only pay attention to the uttered words of Jesus, as long as they are reasonable, cohesive, and do not demonstrate some kind of improbability beyond all reason.
Quote:(December 20, 2014 at 11:47 am)Brucer Wrote: The main reason I chose number two is because it more reflects that truth of the Jesus situation, in my opinion.
Hmmm, so no God necessary? Jesus the teacher will do? I like it. Makes a hell of a lot more sense without the hocus pocus of heaven, hell, creation and so forth.
Well no, a "God" is required, but the "God" Jesus spoke about bears very little resemblance to Jehovah.
(December 20, 2014 at 1:05 pm)professor Wrote: Um Brucer, it is quite clear (if you read the Bible) that Jesus came from the house of David by way of his mother.
He cited what he did to stymie the religious leaders.
Kind of like how religious people today trip over him.
Excuse my french, but the genealogy stuff is "bullshit." It's an embellishment to justify other embellishments.
