|
|
Post by dahduh on Nov 30, 2009 19:20:33 GMT
If you look at all the essential tenets of Christianity - that Jesus was the son of God, born of a virgin, die for our sins etc. - they all come from one place, Judea around 0 CE. From there, this information spread to the rest of the world.
Nobody ever arrived in say Mesoamerica and found the Mayans already knew about Jesus. They all had to be told. The Mormons claim that Jesus visited North America, but this information was only revealed after modern Christianity from the East had already permeated the whole continent.
Why didn't God reveal important details about Christianity elsewhere? It would have been pretty good evidence that this information came from God, rather than a more mundane source, like man.
|
|
naz
Full Member
SYNTHEIST
Posts: 245
|
Post by naz on Nov 30, 2009 20:01:12 GMT
If you look at all the essential tenets of Christianity - that Jesus was the son of God, born of a virgin, die for our sins etc. - they all come from one place, Judea around 0 CE. From there, this information spread to the rest of the world. Nobody ever arrived in say Mesoamerica and found the Mayans already knew about Jesus. They all had to be told. The Mormons claim that Jesus visited North America, but this information was only revealed after modern Christianity from the East had already permeated the whole continent.
Why didn't God reveal important details about Christianity elsewhere? It would have been pretty good evidence that this information came from God, rather than a more mundane source, like man.
A good and fair question. Any answer I give will be pure speculation. I have no inside information. My view is that the entire human race is engaged in a kind of spiritual evolution which parallels our physical evolution. I think that began as soon as humans were able to start thinking about the deeper questions of life. At first the ideas were very primitive. I belief in spirit but not even manifested as any kind of particular form of theism. Something which arose from the experience of awe. Later the ideas became more cohesive and refined. Deities became solidified and identified with forces in nature. This development was mainly seen in agricultural cultures (but including in that pastoral nomadism). One of these was the Hebrew culture. Drawing on ideas found in the cultures around them they began to develop some very unique views which would coalesce into Abrahamic monotheism. Other similar developments were occurring elsewhere as well. There was also increasing ethical development although looking back it does seem quite primitive to us today. Jesus was simply uniquely suited to being born into that particular culture. It was the one in which he could best advance a more highly developed ethical monotheism. Revelation comes to those who are ready and open to receive it. |
|
|
|
Post by dahduh on Dec 1, 2009 9:32:21 GMT
If you look at all the essential tenets of Christianity - that Jesus was the son of God, born of a virgin, die for our sins etc. - they all come from one place, Judea around 0 CE. From there, this information spread to the rest of the world. Nobody ever arrived in say Mesoamerica and found the Mayans already knew about Jesus. They all had to be told. The Mormons claim that Jesus visited North America, but this information was only revealed after modern Christianity from the East had already permeated the whole continent.
Why didn't God reveal important details about Christianity elsewhere? It would have been pretty good evidence that this information came from God, rather than a more mundane source, like man.
A good and fair question. Any answer I give will be pure speculation. I have no inside information. My view is that the entire human race is engaged in a kind of spiritual evolution which parallels our physical evolution. I think that began as soon as humans were able to start thinking about the deeper questions of life. At first the ideas were very primitive. I belief in spirit but not even manifested as any kind of particular form of theism. Something which arose from the experience of awe. Later the ideas became more cohesive and refined. Deities became solidified and identified with forces in nature. This development was mainly seen in agricultural cultures (but including in that pastoral nomadism). One of these was the Hebrew culture. Drawing on ideas found in the cultures around them they began to develop some very unique views which would coalesce into Abrahamic monotheism. Other similar developments were occurring elsewhere as well. There was also increasing ethical development although looking back it does seem quite primitive to us today. Jesus was simply uniquely suited to being born into that particular culture. It was the one in which he could best advance a more highly developed ethical monotheism. Revelation comes to those who are ready and open to receive it. So to provide an analogy, it was a bit like water vapor coalescing around an ice-crystal; the environment has to be right, but once it is started it grows from that point. And if it so happens that only one spot is initially cool enough for an ice crystal to form, then you will only have one ice crystal rather than several. Hmm. I take it then that in addition to awe, you consider monotheism to be an essential element? Why? What about the Hindu idea of God simply manifesting himself as multiple avatars? Was that not good enough? As far as Jesus advancing monotheism is concerned, it can be argued that Christianity is not monotheistic, trinitarian theology notwithstanding. In early Christianity there was a debate as to whether Jesus was divine or not and Rome won, patching up the awkwardness with the trinity. Is the divine Jesus perhaps a corruption of the monotheistic ideal? |
|
naz
Full Member
SYNTHEIST
Posts: 245
|
Post by naz on Dec 1, 2009 17:00:16 GMT
Yes, good analogy.
Monotheism was simply a necessary and further development. It had a unifying effect. But it needn't rule out particularist manifestations of deity. Such as occurs in Hinduism.
Not necessarily as I pointed out above. It's true the trinitarian view won the day but it is also true that no stream of early Christianity ever saw Jesus as a mere man. But what sort of being he was and how he related to God was (and is) a matter of great debate even down to this very day.
|
|
|
|
Post by ydoaPs on Dec 2, 2009 0:35:04 GMT
Why didn't God wait to bring Jesus until modern scientific methods of recording/distributing data were available? Jesus could have been doing miracles on Good Morning America. Not necessarily as I pointed out above. It's true the trinitarian view won the day but it is also true that no stream of early Christianity ever saw Jesus as a mere man. But what sort of being he was and how he related to God was (and is) a matter of great debate even down to this very day. That's actually not true. Even the canonnical texts support a non-divine Jesus(for example, John is the only Gospel to say Jesus is God). |
|
naz
Full Member
SYNTHEIST
Posts: 245
|
Post by naz on Dec 2, 2009 15:29:05 GMT
Why didn't God wait to bring Jesus until modern scientific methods of recording/distributing data were available? Jesus could have been doing miracles on Good Morning America. Not necessarily as I pointed out above. It's true the trinitarian view won the day but it is also true that no stream of early Christianity ever saw Jesus as a mere man. But what sort of being he was and how he related to God was (and is) a matter of great debate even down to this very day. That's actually not true. Even the canonnical texts support a non-divine Jesus(for example, John is the only Gospel to say Jesus is God). I misspoke. I should have said there is no evidence that any group of early (or later) Christians ever saw Jesus as a mere man (just like all other men). While the highest christology is found in John the synoptics do contain information pointing to a divine status as well. Actually no gospel--nor any other NT work--indisputably calls Jesus God. |
|
