Was Jesus a pantheist?

[sin_is_fun]

Could Jesus have been a pantheist?pantheists say that they start off as dualists but at the end of their lives they attain mystical union with the divine.If we accept jesus attained such union with god then all the confusions of trinity will be asnwered.Earlier he was a dualist.So he said "My father is gerater than me".But later he became united with god and said "me and my father are one"

There are theories circulating that he went to kashmir and India where pantheism is practiced.So why dont we consider this option?

[Cathar1950]

I doubt it. I don't know that all pantheist start out as dualist certainly not in any anthropological manner. I am pretty sure he was a Jew and fit within the Jewish spectrum. The Dead Sea Scroll people used astrology were they astrologers now they were Jews and may have picked up astrology from the Persians. Or the Egyptians and Summarians.
Now the two passages you refer to were written at different times at first what ever Jesus said was first That Jesus was less then the Father and make sense. Later they made him equal with the Father. This is more of a progressive theological development of Christology then any kind of incite into what Jesus thought, felt or did. Maybe the Church is Dualistic and Pantheistic but then they are a lot of things.

[sin_is_fun]

Most pantheists start out as dualists.Jesus might have started out as a jew and could have become a pantheist.Kabbalah judaism is pantheism,maybe he even practiced kabbalah.Kabbalah judaism became popular in 11th century but kammablah jews date it back to moses.Maybe jesus was practicing kabbalah,who knows?

Only patheism explains the contradictions in statements of jesus.Earlier he was a dualist then he became pantheist.Just a wild theory though.

[Cathar1950]

sin_is_fun wrote:

Only patheism explains the contradictions in statements of jesus.Earlier he was a dualist then he became pantheist.Just a wild theory though

Only patheism?
Like I said both statements were attributed to Jesus by his followers.
I and the Father are one was clearly influenced by gnosticism and Philo as well and Paul's thought.
Now it depends on what do you mean by Panthesism. Nature worship or the greek roman kind or even the mid-east type will El and his sons.
Or the Summarians or Egyptians. All had a Pantheon of Gods.
Now dualism was a part of Judaism since their Persian experience.
[/i][/b]

[sin_is_fun]

I meant the kabbalah type of pantheism where everything is seen as part of god.Thus a pantheist will see everything in the universe as god.Judaism was dualistic,but kabbalah judaism was pantheistic.Naturre worship was followed by some pantheists,but not by all.

[Arthra]

sin_is_fun wrote:

Only patheism explains the contradictions in statements of jesus.Earlier he was a dualist then he became pantheist.Just a wild theory though

Only patheism?
Like I said both statements were attributed to Jesus by his followers.
I and the Father are one was clearly influenced by gnosticism and Philo as well and Paul's thought.
Now it depends on what do you mean by Panthesism. Nature worship or the greek roman kind or even the mid-east type will El and his sons.
Or the Summarians or Egyptians. All had a Pantheon of Gods.
Now dualism was a part of Judaism since their Persian experience.
[/i][/b]

I think that's a very interesting post... My take on it is that Philo would probably not have been known to the Galileans who spoke mostly Aramaic and were unlearned...that is they didn't have the formal instruction that was associated with "learned men" of their time.

Also Gnosticism probably had its antecedents in Egypt or maybe Alexandria again a good distance from the dusty hills of Galilee..

The Kabbalah developed much later in my opinion...

You do have overlays i think of Philo in the Gospel of John which was in Greek especially the use of the term "Logos"... but John was composed quite late.

So where does this leave us?

I think the original Jesus was not a "pantheist"... He was using the concept of God most familiar in Judaism with an added emphasis on the closeness of God as a "Father"... so this relationship was a mystical one also.

Mysticism is not the same thing as Pantheism...not identical terms at all in my view...

I think the original Jesus used Aramaic predominently and can be better understood through that culture...much has been lost from the original teaching in my view and in translation to Greek.

- Art

[Lynalia]

I dont believe he is a pantheist...but if you look at the actions, and words of jesus...like:

Healing the sick, blind, etc....or stating things such as "The kingdom of God is smaller than a mustard seed" or "The kingdom of god is all around you and also within you"

Than you could say he had many characteristics of the MAGI of his time.
I think Gnostics make a lot of sense on their ideas about jesus, you should look them up.

[Cathar1950]

I am familiar with the Gnostics and many scholars todays are convinced there were Jewish Gnostics before Jesus. The people that wrote the dead Sea scrolls have much in common with them. These people had communities in Alexandria Petra and Galilee. What Jesus also had in common was a critical view of the temple cult run by the High Priest that was run by and for Roman interests. Jesus with his concern for the poor and out casts held the temple which most likely got him killed by the Romans. The NT is largely mythic and lacks historical validity. The writings it contains were aimed at the needs of greek and Roman followers of paul in conflict with the Jerusalem church lead by James Jesus' brother which seems to be a Galilean movement that ended up in Jerusalem. After the destruction of the the temple and the defeat of the Jews in the revolt there became a vacuum and the interests shifted to the Greeks or gentile followers of Paul. All Gospels take a more or less Pauline doctrines as a result of Paul's visions often in conflict with the Jerusalem followers. It is interesting that John used the Logos or Wisdom the feminine aspect of God. Some have proposed that John the beloved disciple was reflections of Mary Magdalene and may have been the beloved disciple later edited to remove her from the the source. In some feminist thinking there is an idea of the Christ being both male and female with the emphasis on relationship. I don't buy the idea of Jesus being God while later Christology turned him into a Greek/Roman man/god. Atonement is not paying for sins rather it is a bringing together God and Humans in a sympathetic relationship.
I would like to follow some of this line of thinking in a few other threads such as:
http://debatingchristianity.com/foru ... 7631#47631
http://www.debatex.com/forum/viewtopic. ... 7209#47209
http://www.debatingchristianity.com/for ... 7090#47090
Wish me luck.