A shift in focus, Part I

[Elijah John]

For debate:

Whether or not the Trinity is an existential reality,

Did Jesus want his disciples to focus their love, worship and devotion on the Father? Or on himself?

Do Chistians today focus most of their love, worship and devotion on the Father? Or on Jesus?

What do you think the real, historical Jesus* would have wanted?

------

*( The Jesus who walked the earth, as opposed to the risen "Christ of Faith" who lives now in Heaven..)

[brianbbs67]

Jesus announced that he came only for the lost sheep of Israel. Calling all back to God thru repentance and actual adherence to the Torah without the manmade traditions that prevented this, period. We should be following God's instructions(Torah) not manmade traditions. This is how "many will cry lord,lord, have we not performed miracles and exorcised demons in your name? and Jesus will reply "I never knew you, you workers of lawlessness." Lots of Hebrews came back to following God. Christians did not exist and are misled to this day.

[marco]

For debate:

Whether or not the Trinity is an existential reality,

Did Jesus want his disciples to focus their love, worship and devotion on the Father? Or on himself?

Do Chistians today focus most of their love, worship and devotion on the Father? Or on Jesus?

What do you think the real, historical Jesus* would have wanted?

John 14:14 tells us: "If you shall ask any thing in my name, I will do it." From this it seems that Jesus was setting himself up in the form that Christians know - someone to pray to and ask for help. And lest we believe Christ intended this offer only for first century beievers we have:

Matthew 28:20 “Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world."


Yes, it is certainly true that Jesus directed attention to "Our Father, who art in heaven...." but I don't think those who devote themselves to Jesus are contravening anything he said. After all, "no one comes to the Father but through me."


My own view is that, as usual, the confusion makes us suspicious.

[Elijah John]

For debate:

Whether or not the Trinity is an existential reality,

Did Jesus want his disciples to focus their love, worship and devotion on the Father? Or on himself?

Do Chistians today focus most of their love, worship and devotion on the Father? Or on Jesus?

What do you think the real, historical Jesus* would have wanted?

John 14:14 tells us: "If you shall ask any thing in my name, I will do it." From this it seems that Jesus was setting himself up in the form that Christians know - someone to pray to and ask for help. And lest we believe Christ intended this offer only for first century beievers we have:

Matthew 28:20 “Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world."


Yes, it is certainly true that Jesus directed attention to "Our Father, who art in heaven...." but I don't think those who devote themselves to Jesus are contravening anything he said. After all, "no one comes to the Father but through me."


My own view is that, as usual, the confusion makes us suspicious.

The earliest, and arguably the more reliable Synoptic Gospels have Jesus directing devotion to the Father, and not so much himself. The more suspect Gospel of John is the one which Jesus grasps for glory for himself as well. It is only in the GoJ that we have Jesus teaching us to pray in his name, and him stating that he is the Way the Truth and the Life...Only in John.

Shouldn't that make us more suspicious of the evangelist John, and consider that it is earliest (Synoptic) Gospels which better represent the sentiments of the real, historical Jesus? More so than the most recent Gospel, the one furthest removed from the events they purport to depict?

I believe it was the founder of the Jesus Seminar who put it nicely in saying that Jesus pointed to the Father, but his disciples could not look away from the pointing finger. (or words to that effect) I think there is much truth to that observation.

[marco]

Shouldn't that make us more suspicious of the evangelist John, and consider that it is earliest (Synoptic) Gospels which better represent the sentiments of the real, historical Jesus? More so than the most recent Gospel, the one furthest removed from the events they purport to depict?

I believe it was the founder of the Jesus Seminar who put it nicely in saying that Jesus pointed to the Father, but his disciples could not look away from the pointing finger. (or words to that effect) I think there is much truth to that observation.

The problem with disregarding John is that our primal sources become like a buffet meal where we pick and choose. Presumably if the Holy Spirit was hovering over the gospel writers, he was as much on John's shoulders as on Mark's.

The observation about the pointing finger is good but if one accepts this, then how can we place great credence on anything such starry-eyed followers said? Such adoration explains Matthew's insane passage about holy corpses walking. Already Jesus was on the way to being a god.

[Elijah John]

[Replying to post 5 by marco]

So are you suggesting we accept it all as inerrant dictate or reject it all as myth and rubbish? Is there to be no in-between for the discerning believer or would-be believer?

If there is a God, isn't it possible (yea likely) that even the Ancients got it right once in a while? And were not 100% wrong all of the time.

And if this is the case, isn't it then a very reasonable approach for us moderns to "pick and choose"? As long as our criteria isn't random, but is based on some reasonable methodology. (reason being a God-given faculty and all ) If God did indeed give us reason, wouldn't he expect us to apply it to even what many call Sacred Scripture?

[Avoice]

[Replying to post 1 by Elijah John]

HIMSELF!!

DONT EVER FORGET THIS.
CHRISTIANS:PAY CLOSE ATTENTION TO YOUR JESUS. HE SAID:

"Whoever speaks on their own does so to gain personal glory, but he who seeks the glory of the one who sent him is a man of truth; there is nothing false about him"

DID YOU HEAR WHAT HESUS JUST TOLD YOU?
NOW HEAR HIM SPEAK AGAIN BELOW.
WHOSE GLORY DOES HE SEEK? WHOSE? HIS!!!


"Father, I will that they also, whom thou hast given me, be with ME where I AM ; that they may behold MY GLORY which thou hast given me: for thou lovedst ME before the foundation of the world"

HIS GLORY!! BE WHERE HE IS.... Just where is that Jesus? You never do tell us where it was you were going.

Jesus seeks his own glory. He tells us how to tell if he's a phony. And no one cares to hear it. It's all about worshipping him..HIS glory....Be where HE is. Hmmmmmm

[Elijah John]

[Replying to post 1 by Elijah John]

HIMSELF!!

DONT EVER FORGET THIS.
CHRISTIANS:PAY CLOSE ATTENTION TO YOUR JESUS. HE SAID:

"Whoever speaks on their own does so to gain personal glory, but he who seeks the glory of the one who sent him is a man of truth; there is nothing false about him"

DID YOU HEAR WHAT HESUS JUST TOLD YOU?
NOW HEAR HIM SPEAK AGAIN BELOW.
WHOSE GLORY DOES HE SEEK? WHOSE? HIS!!!


"Father, I will that they also, whom thou hast given me, be with ME where I AM ; that they may behold MY GLORY which thou hast given me: for thou lovedst ME before the foundation of the world"

HIS GLORY!! BE WHERE HE IS.... Just where is that Jesus? You never do tell us where it was you were going.

Jesus seeks his own glory. He tells us how to tell if he's a phony. And no one cares to hear it. It's all about worshipping him..HIS glory....Be where HE is. Hmmmmmm

The Jesus of the Synoptics seemed to direct worship to the Father, and not so much to himself.

In John, it is reversed. But I wonder if the real, historical Jesus did this, or only the Jesus of the Gospels. I do believe the two are not always one in the same. I think it likely the real historical Jesus was a Sh'ma affirming Jew, who tried to implement reforms and not start a new religion. And yes, he may have (mistakenly) believed he was the Messiah. But I doubt very much Jesus believed himself to be God.

It's ironic that Paul says that Jesus "emptied himself, and did not grasp for glory" (to paraphrase). Yet in John, (as you point out) he seems to do just that!