1. Joined
    14 May '02
    Moves
    9580
    26 Dec '06 23:07
    Anyone see this Channel 4 documentary on Christmas Day, presented by theologian Robert Backford ?

    The Channel 4 website summarises Backford's conclusions thus :

    "In Channel 4's The Secret Family of Jesus, Robert Beckford explores the historical evidence for claims that Jesus had brothers and sisters, cousins, aunts, uncles and nephews, as well as a deep friendship with Mary Magdalene. Beckford and many other theologians believe that Jesus did indeed have an extended family that survived some 300 years after his death. However, they have been airbrushed from history and excised from the Bible as the result of a power struggle in the early church.

    The idea that Jesus was a divine being is backed by the claim that his mother Mary was a virgin and that his birth was the miraculous work of God.
    There is evidence from the Gospels and other documents that Mary and Joseph had other children besides Jesus, and that he grew up in an ordinary Jewish family, surrounded by brothers and sisters.
    For most Christians Mary's virginity is central to their faith, and many consider it heresy to suggest that Jesus was not her only child.
    After Jesus died, those descended from his family and friends, led by his brother James, saw the original Christian message as a renewed version of Judaism, and first and foremost wanted to persuade other Jews to join them.
    In opposition to Jesus' family, Christians led by Peter and Paul wanted to establish a new religion to include non-Jews.
    Peter and Paul's version won out. They placed more emphasis on Jesus' divinity rather than his humanity, and wrote the human story of Jesus' family out of Christian history.
    Peter and Paul's version of Christianity developed in opposition to the Jewish Christianity of Jesus family and friends and resulted in a seam of antisemitism down the ages.
    Some churches explain the references in the Bible to Jesus' brothers and sisters by saying either that they were not Mary's children but the children of Joseph from a previous marriage, or that they were cousins of Jesus.
    According to the earliest Gospel (of Mark) Jesus was a disciple of John, who taught and baptised him, and not the other way round.
    Jews and Muslims see Jesus as a prophet – a human being with a powerful message to change the world – rather than the son of God.
    Some say that the historical evidence of Jesus' humanity and teachings invalidates 2,000 years of Church teaching that has given more emphasis to his divinity.
    Some argue that Jesus' humanity and revolutionary teachings – his blueprint for a 'Kingdom of God on earth' – are the foundations of Christian belief.
    Christian tradition says that salvation can only come through faith in Jesus Christ as the Son of God and a literal belief that he died and rose again. "

    This understates the extent to which Beckford, a committed Christian, questioned the whole basis of Christianity. Relying on the bible and other historical documents, he provided evidence that the whole idea of Jesus's divinity was something invented by Paul and his followers years after Jesus's death. Jesus's brother James the Just, who was the first Christian leader after Christ, made no such claims. It can reasonably be argued from the historical evidence that Jesus was a disciple of John the Baptist who became an inspirational teacher himself in John's tradition. The people who took over leadership of Christianity in later years rewrote the Jesus story to suit their own purposes, and we can see evidence of this in the bible. Whereas the earliest gospel refers to Jesus's blood family by name and makes no reference to the virgin birth, later gospels edit Jesus's brothers and sisters out of the story and make Jesus into this mystical divine figure. It's not a very big step from here to suppose that the story of the resurrection was also a much later invention.
  2. Joined
    16 Oct '06
    Moves
    4532
    26 Dec '06 23:20
    Beckford himself highlighted the problem you will have discussing this here in his summing up. While it was obvious he was satisfied that he had proved his theories to be correct, he still said he believed Jesus was the son of God.
  3. Joined
    06 Jul '06
    Moves
    2926
    27 Dec '06 02:411 edit
    why does any of this matter? the basis of my belief is not that marry is a virgin, its that the bible is the word of God, not written by God of course and probably corrupted or altered, but you know what i mean.
  4. Joined
    03 Sep '06
    Moves
    9895
    27 Dec '06 02:47
    Originally posted by EcstremeVenom
    why does any of this matter?
    you really don't see it matter? Can GOD have brothers or sisters?
  5. Joined
    06 Jul '06
    Moves
    2926
    27 Dec '06 02:53
    Originally posted by ahosyney
    you really don't see it matter? Can GOD have brothers or sisters?
    Jesus is not God, Jesus is the son of God
  6. Joined
    03 Sep '06
    Moves
    9895
    27 Dec '06 03:00
    Originally posted by EcstremeVenom
    Jesus is not God, Jesus is the son of God
    Wow , this is another problem.

    The Christians in my country belive that he is GOD. They say the son of GOD is GOD.

    Any way, Is he a real son, or son by allegory.

    GOD can't have a real son, and Jesus is not the only son by allegory.
  7. Standard memberscottishinnz
    Kichigai!
    Osaka
    Joined
    27 Apr '05
    Moves
    8592
    27 Dec '06 03:09
    Originally posted by ahosyney
    GOD can't have a real son, and Jesus is not the only son by allegory.
    Surely, an omnipotent god could have a real son, should he so choose.
  8. Joined
    03 Sep '06
    Moves
    9895
    27 Dec '06 03:391 edit
    Originally posted by scottishinnz
    Surely, an omnipotent god could have a real son, should he so choose.
    It has nothing to do with omniptent,

    To have a son, it means that part of you is separated to form the son.

    So it means GOD separated into parts, which is aganist perfection of GOD.

    And the son has the same attributes of his father, which make him another GOD. And that is not possible.

    Because if there is two GODs with omniptent, then it could happen that one of them want something and the other don't. Which mean one of them will do what he wants and the other will not. So the one who was not able to do what he wants will not have omniptent and hense will not be GOD.

    So GOD can't have a real son. Not because he can't do that, but because it agnist GOD attributes.
  9. Joined
    06 Jul '06
    Moves
    2926
    27 Dec '06 04:34
    Originally posted by ahosyney
    Wow , this is another problem.

    The Christians in my country belive that he is GOD. They say the son of GOD is GOD.

    Any way, Is he a real son, or son by allegory.

    GOD can't have a real son, and Jesus is not the only son by allegory.
    everyone believes different, i think. some believe in that god the father, god the son and god the holy spirit or something like that, i dont think i do.
  10. Standard memberscottishinnz
    Kichigai!
    Osaka
    Joined
    27 Apr '05
    Moves
    8592
    27 Dec '06 05:34
    Originally posted by ahosyney
    It has nothing to do with omniptent,

    To have a son, it means that part of you is separated to form the son.

    So it means GOD separated into parts, which is aganist perfection of GOD.

    And the son has the same attributes of his father, which make him another GOD. And that is not possible.

    Because if there is two GODs with omniptent, then it could ...[text shortened]... OD can't have a real son. Not because he can't do that, but because it agnist GOD attributes.
    So, a non-omnipotent god then. Another contradiction.
  11. Earth
    Joined
    20 Oct '06
    Moves
    2190
    27 Dec '06 08:12
    Everybody believes differently, but what is the truth?
  12. Joined
    03 Sep '06
    Moves
    9895
    27 Dec '06 15:14
    Originally posted by scottishinnz
    So, a non-omnipotent god then. Another contradiction.
    Another contradiction with what?, oh my GOD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

    Did you read what I wrote? I was trying to show a logical explaination. But it seams you see only your point of view.
  13. Standard memberspruce112358
    Democracy Advocate
    Joined
    23 Oct '04
    Moves
    4402
    27 Dec '06 19:48
    Originally posted by ahosyney
    It has nothing to do with omniptent,

    To have a son, it means that part of you is separated to form the son.

    So it means GOD separated into parts, which is aganist perfection of GOD.

    And the son has the same attributes of his father, which make him another GOD. And that is not possible.

    Because if there is two GODs with omniptent, then it could ...[text shortened]... OD can't have a real son. Not because he can't do that, but because it agnist GOD attributes.
    As a rational argument, that is very nicely put.

    Whether Jesus was God or man was always hugely controversial. To make the argument work that Jesus was God, you have to separate God into 2 parts -- and then assert that they are not separate. The Catholics of course went one further and made God into three -- Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. And then they went on to say that they were all the same. Separate but one. The Holy Trinity. Hence the other name for Catholics which is Trinitarians.

    The Unitarian Christians though said, 'No, that's a bunch of baloney. God is one and Jesus was an inspirational teacher, not God. He was the Son of God in the sense that we are all Sons of God." So Unitarians believe in the Unity of God -- as against the Trinitarian or Catholic view.

    The Unitarians were an early Protestant group -- much earlier (and much more heretical) than Martin Luther.
  14. Joined
    02 Apr '06
    Moves
    3637
    27 Dec '06 21:05
    Originally posted by bolshevik
    Anyone see this Channel 4 documentary on Christmas Day, presented by theologian Robert Backford ?

    The Channel 4 website summarises Backford's conclusions thus :

    "In Channel 4's The Secret Family of Jesus, Robert Beckford explores the historical evidence for claims that Jesus had brothers and sisters, cousins, aunts, uncles and nephews, as well as a d ...[text shortened]... ppose that the story of the resurrection was also a much later invention.
    so much more human don't you think?
  15. Joined
    29 Oct '06
    Moves
    225
    27 Dec '06 21:33
    Originally posted by bolshevik
    Anyone see this Channel 4 documentary on Christmas Day, presented by theologian Robert Backford ?

    The Channel 4 website summarises Backford's conclusions thus :

    "In Channel 4's The Secret Family of Jesus, Robert Beckford explores the historical evidence for claims that Jesus had brothers and sisters, cousins, aunts, uncles and nephews, as well as a d ...[text shortened]... ppose that the story of the resurrection was also a much later invention.
    What I find interesting is that people care so much. Why does it matter who Jesus was? If he had some good ideas, why not follow them simply because they were good ideas? Does it really matter who came up with them?
Back to Top