• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Son of Man -VS- Son of God

Meander_Z

Member
No. The willingness of someone to respect scholarship rather than arrogantly presuming that one's preferred narrative is somehow of equal value.
My preferred narrative is of greater value to me me personally than scholarship can ever be. I don't live according to scholarship but according to my preferred narrative.

Regarding respect for scholarship... I have a great respect for scholarship, not as more valuable or less valuable in a subjective sense, but as a standard by which to compare and contrast ideas in an objective manner. Scholarship deserves respect not because it is always right, but because it strives to present evidences in support of ideas.

The article you cited did not present any direct evidences but rather presented a reading list of sources where such evidences may be found, and had no direct impact on the point I was making. If I should happen to read any of those sources in the future I will be happy to notify you of their relative value in relationship to my preferred narrative. I can neither accept nor reject any of those evidences without knowing precisely what they are, and taking an opportunity to compare them with other scholarly sources. You do realize (I hope) that not all scholars universally agree on everything. Scholarship is not the new almighty which declares the truth in a final and absolute manner. Scholarship is useful, but is constantly redefining itself in the hopes of achieving greater objectivity. It is the only reason that scholarship deserves respect, otherwise we might very well just stick with the Bible as the source of absolute truth, after all it has been an authority for much longer than Wikipedia.
 

psychoslice

Veteran Member
When Jesus said he was the son of man he was talking from his inner divinity, when we ourselves realize we are all one, we also can say we are the son of man, we are all also the son of God, Jesus didn't have the monopoly on being one with anyone, we are all as much divine as Jesus, when we realize our true SELF.
 

Jayhawker Soule

-- untitled --
Premium Member
From the same source you gave, just the next sentence:

<< Although there has been some controversy over the letter, today it is generally agreed that the letter is authentic correspondence written by Clement. >>

So, what's your point?
You wrote:

Secret Mark is actually a letter from Clement of Alexandria to Theodore.

The cited reference notes:

The Secret Gospel of Mark is known only from the references in this letter.
There is a difference between "is actually a letter" and "is known only from the references in this letter" irrespective of the authenticity of that letter.
 

rusra02

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
You said Jesus is the Son of God. You believe he is the physical or begotten son of God.

Then Ephraim has to be Jesus's elder brother, because he was called Protokos. First born by God himself.
Also Israel.

Are they all one family?
Could you share the scriptures that discuss this?
 

paarsurrey

Veteran Member
Jeremiah 31:9

A good point:

Jeremiah 31:9
9 They shall come with weeping; and with supplications will I lead them: I will cause them to walk by rivers of waters, in a straight way wherein they shall not stumble; for I am a father to Israel, and Ephraim is my first-born.
http://www.religiousforums.com/bible/jeremiah/31:9/

But Christians quote from Torah for others, they themselves don't believe in it because Torah is a Jewish scripture not of the Christians. Right?

Regards
 

Nefelie

Member
...And from the Acts of John, as promised:

He bade us therefore make as it were a ring, holding one another's hands, and himself standing in the midst he said: Answer Amen unto me. He began, then, to sing an hymn and to say:

That’s a classic ceremonial formation, as most of you already know.

Glory be to thee, Father.
And we, going about in a ring, answered him: Amen.
Glory be to thee, Word: Glory be to thee, Grace. Amen.
Glory be to thee, Spirit: Glory be to thee, Holy One:
Glory be to thy glory. Amen.
We praise thee, O Father; we give thanks to thee, O Light, wherein darkness dwelleth not. Amen.
Now whereas (or wherefore) we give thanks, I say:
I would be saved, and I would save. Amen.
I would be loosed, and I would loose. Amen.
I would be wounded, and I would wound. Amen.
I would be born, and I would bear. Amen.
I would eat, and I would be eaten. Amen.
I would hear, and I would be heard. Amen.
I would be thought, being wholly thought. Amen.
I would be washed, and I would wash. Amen.
Grace danceth. I would pipe; dance ye all. Amen.
I would mourn: lament ye all. Amen.

This part is very much alike some older Mysteries from pantheistic religions, such as the Orphics the Panians and the Dionysians. The sense of circle in all things is very clear.

It also kinda reminds of the Book of Tao... Doesn’t it?

The number Eight (lit. one ogdoa = 1/8) singeth praise with us. Amen.
The number Twelve danceth on high. Amen.
The Whole on high hath part in our dancing. Amen.

Number 8 is considered the “number of man” and number 12 the divine number. This part seems like a calling for the higher to connect with the lower.

Whos danceth not, knoweth not what cometh to pass. Amen.
I would flee, and I would stay. Amen.
I would adorn, and I would be adorned. Amen.
I would be united, and I would unite. Amen.
A house I have not, and I have houses. Amen.
A place I have not, and I have places. Amen.
A temple I have not, and I have temples. Amen.
A lamp am I to thee that beholdest me. Amen.
A mirror am I to thee that perceivest me. Amen.
A door am I to thee that knockest at me. Amen.
A way am I to thee a wayfarer.
Now answer thou (or as thou respondest) unto my dancing. Behold
thyself in me who speak, and seeing what I do, keep silence about my mysteries.

~ Acts of John 94-96 ~

Your comments will be much appreciated :)

.
 

Nefelie

Member
You wrote:
Secret Mark is actually a letter from Clement of Alexandria to Theodore.
The cited reference notes:
The Secret Gospel of Mark is known only from the references in this letter.
There is a difference between "is actually a letter" and "is known only from the references in this letter" irrespective of the authenticity of that letter.

Do you really think that this is what's important about the narrative presented? ...If it is called "Secret Mark" or "Clements' Letter" or even... "Tallulah"?

.
 

Jayhawker Soule

-- untitled --
Premium Member
Do you really think that this is what's important about the narrative presented?
I offered a brief correction, principally because I dislike sloppiness with regards to source material. Best I can tell, the only one making a bid deal about this is you.
 

Nefelie

Member
My point wasn't that self sacrifice was the global shift, but rather that it led to one. The Christ motif is in many ways based on the template of the mystery cults of Dionysus and Mithras, gods who die and are reborn. The change it brought about led toward an understanding of the death of God, not as a metaphor for the cycle of life and death, but rather as a literal singular event which bares the promise of eternal life for all believers.

Hmm… I’m not sure about this… Dionysus Zagreas was considered to be an actual historical man (travelling from Asia Minor to Greece, with a stop on island Naxos). The attributes given to him are very much alike Jesus: actual man, son of a god (Zeus), actually sacrificed himself and then resurrected.

It is also said that, when Paul visited Athens to preach about the Christ, the Athenians told him: <<we already know this god you speak of. But his name is not Jesus but Dionysus>>.

The mysteries promised eternal life also, but such was gained by participating in and understanding the nature of the mystery. Initiates enacted their own self sacrifice as a metaphorical proclamation of their own divinity. Jesus took that a step further and actually died in proclamation of his own divinity...

I’m a bit sceptical about Jesus’ actual death and resurrection. Given the fact that we still have no good evidence of his existence and we do see many older religions’ concepts in his story, I have come to see his death and resurrection as symbolic. The inner death of the man and resurrection/rebirth of the god. Which also brings in mind the older mysteries.

But, of course, I do understand your point, given that it was later considered as an actual event and not a symbolic one.

Compare the divine claim of Augustus Caesar... sure history remembers him, but how many churches are dedicated to his worship. None.

Hahaha… All Caesars claimed to be gods or sons of gods. So did the Pharaohs. If we where to build churches for each and every one of them, we wouldn’t have space left for houses! :D

(Just joking, of course :) )

~~~

In reality 'son of man' was the title of the one in Daniel who comes in the clouds in Daniel 7 to be served by all people tribes and languages and so 'son of man' and 'son of God' are the same emphasizing different things. Jesus is fully man (son of man) and fully God (son of God)
Two sides of the same coin

Jesus has also been called “the perfect man” and believed that who ever follows his path will also become a Christ, a perfect man. Based on his teachings, this claim seems valid. So, Jesus is not really something more special than any other human.

.
 

paarsurrey

Veteran Member
OK, more details as promised:
1) Secret Mark is actually a letter from Clement of Alexandria to Theodore. It is very interesting in whole and I think that everyone should read it, as it reveals some interesting “way of thinking” of the synoptics at the time. But any way, that’s not my point for now.
For now, I’d like to present this particular narrative of the letter:
<<…And they come into Bethany. And a certain woman whose brother had died was there. And, coming, she prostrated herself before Jesus and says to him, 'Son of David, have mercy on me.' But the disciples rebuked her. And Jesus, being angered, went off with her into the garden where the tomb was, and straightway a great cry was heard from the tomb. And going near, Jesus rolled away the stone from the door of the tomb. And straightaway, going in where the youth was, he stretched forth his hand and raised him, seizing his hand. But the youth, looking upon him, loved him and began to beseech him that he might be with him. And going out of the tomb, they came into the house of the youth, for he was rich. And after six days Jesus told him what to do, and in the evening the youth comes to him, wearing a linen cloth over his naked body. And he remained with him that night, for Jesus taught him the mystery of the Kingdom of God. And thence, arising, he returned to the other side of the Jordan…>>
This is about Lazarus, but so differently shown.
First of, it is much clear that “the youth” was not dead in the tomb. He was alive and crying out. This reminds us of certain initiations by the older religions that included the “experience of death” in a tomb (which represents the womb), for the neophyte to face his fears and then be reborn. Some masons still practice that. Seems like Lazarus was not yet ready for this experience and paniced. Hence the cries.
Second of, that “linen cloth over his naked body” is so obviously a ceremonial clothing. And, by the looks of it, Jesus prepared him for the initiation, “told him what to do” and “taught him the mystery of the Kingdom of God”… What is that if not an initiation to some mystery?
...I’ll be back with the Acts of John ;)
.

Lazarus was not raised from the literal dead, but he was dead spiritually and Jesus took him for initiation to his group and teachings:
Luke 9:60
59Then He said to another man, “Follow Me.” “Lord,” the man replied, “first let me go and bury my father.” 60 Bu tJesus told him, “Let the dead bury their own dead. You,however, go and proclaim the kingdom of God.” 61Still another said, “I will follow You, Lord; but first let me bid farewell to my family.”…
Berean Study Bible http://biblehub.com/luke/9-60.htm
The Christians understand the phenomenon wrogly.
Regards
 

Meander_Z

Member
Hmm… I’m not sure about this… Dionysus Zagreas was considered to be an actual historical man (travelling from Asia Minor to Greece, with a stop on island Naxos). The attributes given to him are very much alike Jesus: actual man, son of a god (Zeus), actually sacrificed himself and then resurrected.

It is also said that, when Paul visited Athens to preach about the Christ, the Athenians told him: <<we already know this god you speak of. But his name is not Jesus but Dionysus>>.

.

I've encountered some reference to Dionysus Zagreas, but I don't think I'm familiar with your source... and I'm one to gobble up all info with even slight reference to Dionysus. Do you mind sharing where this came from? Mostly any reference to a man Dionysus that I've come across has been in the debate on the history of Viniculture, which occasionally wants to attribute the cultivation of grapes as an innovation of a single man named Dionysus, rather than a tradition associated with the spread of a religion. I'm familiar with Zagreus as the first manifestation of Dionysus has taught by the Mystery Cults of late antiquity, but I'm very curious about this new info.

The Athenian reference doesn't surprise me! It seems entirely naturally to me that the Athenians would hear about Jesus and assume him to be Dionysus... they have so much in common, even some of the epithets associated with them. I don't know that this alone would give credence to the existence of a literal human Dionysus though... I want your sources! :)
 

Nefelie

Member
.
One of the best sources I have ever read so far for the bases of Christ and Dionysus, is the book: Ι.Χ.Θ.Υ.Σ. by professors Straros Theodosiou and Manos Danezis, but it’s only in Greek. Sorry :(

Another very interesting and very carefully written book, is Greek Religion by Walter Burkert.

The well known ancient Greek Tragedy The Bacchae by Euripides, is also a good source on the subject. It has inspired many papers about the relation between Dionysus and Christ.

It has also inspired papers that compare Euripides’ tragedy with Gregory of Nazianzus the Teologician’s tragedy: O Christos Pasxon (Christ’s passion… I’m not sure of the translation).

And of course I’m sure you know this:
OrpheusGuthrie.jpg

“Orpheus Bacchus” on the cross. An amulet of the 3rd century. It's a... synopsis of all this, isn't it? :)

Just a tiny bit off topic: notice the seven stars and the crescent moon on top of the cross. Doesn’t it kinda remind you of this:

<<And there appeared a great wonder in heaven; a woman clothed with the sun, and the moon under her feet, and upon her head a crown of twelve stars>> [Rev. 1:12]

%CE%A0%CE%B1%CE%BD%CE%B1%CE%B3%CE%AF%CE%B1-%CE%B7%CE%BC%CE%B9%CF%83%CE%AD%CE%BB%CE%B7%CE%BD%CE%BF%CF%82.PNG


And also:

<<And in the midst of the seven candlesticks one like unto the Son of man, clothed with a garment down to the foot, and girt about the paps with a golden girdle.His head and his hairs were white like wool, as white as snow; and his eyes were as a flame of fire; And his feet like unto fine brass, as if they burned in a furnace; and his voice as the sound of many waters. And he had in his right hand seven stars: and out of his mouth went a sharp twoedged sword: and his countenance was as the sun shineth in his strength>> [Rev. 1:13-16]

Which has been considered to be the constellation of Orion? Another figure related with Christ?...


.
 

Sleeppy

Fatalist. Christian. Pacifist.
OK, more details as promised:

1) Secret Mark is actually a letter from Clement of Alexandria to Theodore. It is very interesting in whole and I think that everyone should read it, as it reveals some interesting “way of thinking” of the synoptics at the time. But any way, that’s not my point for now.

For now, I’d like to present this particular narrative of the letter:

<<…And they come into Bethany. And a certain woman whose brother had died was there. And, coming, she prostrated herself before Jesus and says to him, 'Son of David, have mercy on me.' But the disciples rebuked her. And Jesus, being angered, went off with her into the garden where the tomb was, and straightway a great cry was heard from the tomb. And going near, Jesus rolled away the stone from the door of the tomb. And straightaway, going in where the youth was, he stretched forth his hand and raised him, seizing his hand. But the youth, looking upon him, loved him and began to beseech him that he might be with him. And going out of the tomb, they came into the house of the youth, for he was rich. And after six days Jesus told him what to do, and in the evening the youth comes to him, wearing a linen cloth over his naked body. And he remained with him that night, for Jesus taught him the mystery of the Kingdom of God. And thence, arising, he returned to the other side of the Jordan…>>

This is about Lazarus, but so differently shown.

First of, it is much clear that “the youth” was not dead in the tomb. He was alive and crying out. This reminds us of certain initiations by the older religions that included the “experience of death” in a tomb (which represents the womb), for the neophyte to face his fears and then be reborn. Some masons still practice that. Seems like Lazarus was not yet ready for this experience and paniced. Hence the cries.

Second of, that “linen cloth over his naked body” is so obviously a ceremonial clothing. And, by the looks of it, Jesus prepared him for the initiation, “told him what to do” and “taught him the mystery of the Kingdom of God”… What is that if not an initiation to some mystery?

...I’ll be back with the Acts of John ;)

.
Glad it was brought to my attention.. This version is actually a lot less mysterious for me, than the official account.
 

paarsurrey

Veteran Member
.
One of the best sources I have ever read so far for the bases of Christ and Dionysus, is the book: Ι.Χ.Θ.Υ.Σ. by professors Straros Theodosiou and Manos Danezis, but it’s only in Greek. Sorry :(

Another very interesting and very carefully written book, is
Greek Religion by Walter Burkert.
The well known ancient Greek Tragedy
The Bacchae by Euripides, is also a good source on the subject. It has inspired many papers about the relation between Dionysus and Christ.
It has also inspired papers that compare Euripides’ tragedy with Gregory of Nazianzus the Teologician’s tragedy:
O Christos Pasxon (Christ’s passion… I’m not sure of the translation).
And of course I’m sure you know this:
OrpheusGuthrie.jpg

“Orpheus Bacchus” on the cross. An amulet of the 3rd century. It's a... synopsis of all this, isn't it? :)

Just a tiny bit off topic: notice the seven stars and the crescent moon on top of the cross. Doesn’t it kinda remind you of this:

<<And there appeared a great wonder in heaven; a woman clothed with the sun, and the moon under her feet, and upon her head a crown of twelve stars>> [Rev. 1:12]

%CE%A0%CE%B1%CE%BD%CE%B1%CE%B3%CE%AF%CE%B1-%CE%B7%CE%BC%CE%B9%CF%83%CE%AD%CE%BB%CE%B7%CE%BD%CE%BF%CF%82.PNG


And also:

<<And in the midst of the seven candlesticks one like unto the Son of man, clothed with a garment down to the foot, and girt about the paps with a golden girdle.His head and his hairs were white like wool, as white as snow; and his eyes were as a flame of fire; And his feet like unto fine brass, as if they burned in a furnace; and his voice as the sound of many waters. And he had in his right hand seven stars: and out of his mouth went a sharp twoedged sword: and his countenance was as the sun shineth in his strength>> [Rev. 1:13-16]

Which has been considered to be the constellation of Orion? Another figure related with Christ?...


.
Sure, Christianity has nothing to do with Jesus son of Mary.
Regards
 

firedragon

Veteran Member
When Jesus said he was the son of man he was talking from his inner divinity, when we ourselves realize we are all one, we also can say we are the son of man, we are all also the son of God, Jesus didn't have the monopoly on being one with anyone, we are all as much divine as Jesus, when we realize our true SELF.

Was it the same with Ezekiel?
 

Thief

Rogue Theologian
did anyone note?.....

Adam is a chosen son of God
and Jesus is called the begotten Son of God
 
Top