• 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!

Was Jesus a Mystic and Pantheist

The Hammer

Skald
Premium Member
I would say yes, as evidenced by John 10:31-34.

31 Again his Jewish opponents picked up stones to stone him, 32 but Jesus said to them, “I have shown you many good works from the Father. For which of these do you stone me?”

33 “We are not stoning you for any good work,” they replied, “but for blasphemy, because you, a mere man, claim to be God.”

34 Jesus answered them, “Is it not written in your Law, ‘I have said you are “gods”’
 

Windwalker

Veteran Member
Premium Member
I would say yes, as evidenced by John 10:31-34.

31 Again his Jewish opponents picked up stones to stone him, 32 but Jesus said to them, “I have shown you many good works from the Father. For which of these do you stone me?”

33 “We are not stoning you for any good work,” they replied, “but for blasphemy, because you, a mere man, claim to be God.”

34 Jesus answered them, “Is it not written in your Law, ‘I have said you are “gods”’
I would say definitely yes he was a mystic, but more than a pantheist, or a theist, he was a panentheist, who believed in both the transcendence and the immanence of God, or the Divine.

Panentheism is paradoxial and nondual. Traditional theism as well as pantheism are dualitist views. where God is either outside creation, or is creation itself. Monism is dualistic in nature, as Nagarjuna pointed out.
 

The Hammer

Skald
Premium Member
Was Jesus a Mystic and Pantheist


Does it really matter if a mythical entity is or is not a mystic?
Does it really matter if a mythical entity is or is not a pantheist?

Pretty sure he was a historical figure, but hey.

You do you.

You're being awfully antagonistic today.
 
Last edited:

Guitar's Cry

Disciple of Pan
Does it really matter if a mythical entity is or is not a mystic?
Does it really matter if a mythical entity is or is not a pantheist?

Yes. Mythology is a kind of roadmap for meaning or ritual; an artform meant to inspire a person towards something meaningful.

How one interprets a myth influences the message, similar to how someone responds to any other artform.

I view the Christ myth as Christ being a mystic in a way that will always be both pantheistic/panentheistic. I say both because while he makes statements concerning all people being gods, it's essentially suggesting that God is transcendent because as conscious parts of the whole we can never be aware of ourselves as the whole, but remove that consciousness and there is the no"thing"ness of everything without the defining features of a reality being experienced.

Hence the cross: two parts of a whole upon which Christ, dying, realizing the relationship and returning to God, in a transcendent "body."
 
Last edited:

Windwalker

Veteran Member
Premium Member
Yes. Mythology is a kind of roadmap for meaning or ritual; an artform meant to inspire a person towards something meaningful.
I like the way you say this. I agree. “Myth is my tongue, which means not that I cheat, but stagger in a light too great to bear.” ~ E.H.W. Meyer-Stein
 

stvdv

Veteran Member
33 “We are not stoning you for any good work,” they replied, “but for blasphemy, because you, a mere man, claim to be God.”

34 Jesus answered them, “Is it not written in your Law, ‘I have said you are “gods”’
Thanks, I like that verse.

So, the Bible, well Jesus, speaks about God + god(s).

IF I am god
THEN I see no harm in believing in god as it's important to have Self Confidence

And from this context, Jesus kind of advises us to believe in god, and even declare "I am God". Seems even that god = God (note: this does not imply that God = god)
 

The Hammer

Skald
Premium Member
Thanks, I like that verse.

So, the Bible, well Jesus, speaks about God + god(s).

IF I am god
THEN I see no harm in believing in god as it's important to have Self Confidence

And from this context, Jesus kind of advises us to believe in god, and even declare "I am God". Seems even that god = God (note: this does not imply that God = god)

If god=God why wouldn't God =god?

I think God=Gods, try that math. :p
 

stvdv

Veteran Member
If god=God why wouldn't God =god?
Spiritual Masters told me to never put God on the left side of "="

That makes sense to me, because it would limit God to ONLY that what is written on the right side of "="

And God is defined as all these omnis, hence you can't put it on the left side, unless you put on the right side ALL options, which is problematic having these omnis, and they also defined God as beyond words and limits, which makes it even more difficult to define God (limit God), hence the "note"
 

Truthseeker

Non-debating member when I can help myself
I would say definitely yes he was a mystic, but more than a pantheist, or a theist, he was a panentheist, who believed in both the transcendence and the immanence of God, or the Divine.
Pretty close to the truth as I see it. God is not literally in us, but we are in His image. Hard to say if that is panentheism.
 

The Hammer

Skald
Premium Member
I'm not qualified to answer that. Within a picture, though, would not be a good way to put it.

Sure you are! We are all qualified to speculate. And moving picture (movie) is still an image, eh?

I like the dream idea. The aboriginals of Australia call our experience of the world "The Dreaming".
 

Windwalker

Veteran Member
Premium Member
Pretty close to the truth as I see it. God is not literally in us, but we are in His image. Hard to say if that is panentheism.
To say we are created in the image of God is a true statement. But it is a true statement from a dualistic perspective. That is to speak of ourselves as separate from other things we perceive. Dualism is a perception of reality based upon subject/object relationships.

To say that God is within us, acknowledges the immanence of the Divine, or Spirit, or God (different words, same referent), within creation itself. It speaks to the immanence, or Presence, of God. God is not separate from the world, but is wholly Present within the world, down to every molecule and atom of it.

You are not the first person I heard who recognizes God is present within creation, but when it comes to seeing the Divine, they separate it outside of themselves, and themselves outside of creation itself as well. Again, that reflects a dualistic perception of subject/object division. They can see God in the world, but not in themselves. And that is a perceptual phenomena. largely reinforced by the language we use which is based upon dualist perceptions.

One trick to get the mind to see beyond that is a simple thought experiment. Do you believe God is Infinite, or finite? To say God is finite, makes God a creature, or a specific form of some sort or another, like a tree, or a house, or a chair, or a cat, etc. But that God cannot then be said to be Infinite.

If God is Infinite, that means there are no edges or boundaries around God. God is limitless, everywhere at all times, and no "where" in particular, like being down at the store or at the park instead of in the lake.

If God is not inside of us, then that creates holes inside the Divine, and God becomes like a block of Swiss Cheese. There is somewhere, that God's being, is not. That makes God finite in nature.

That creates a contradiction to the very theistic definition of God as Infinite, or the big three, Omnipotent, Omniscient, and Omnipresent. If God is outside of us, he is not Omnipresent, and then the other two Omni qualities soon fall as well.

Why I believe Jesus spoke through a panentheistic, or nondualist perception of the Divine, is because his language speaks paradoxically of God "in heaven", while at the same time fully immanent here on earth and in all creation. "Thy will be done on heaven as it is on earth". He spoke of God as in heaven, and then said that those who abide in Spirit, or following God's Will, he will be in them and they in him. Jn. 15:4

Plus there are many references within scripture that speaks of Spirit within us. God in us. Christ in us, etc. There really is no difference between being in the image of God, and God being in us. We are in the imagine of God, because the Divine is fully immanent within us. That we don't see that, or realize the, is a perceptual blindness only.

Make sense, at least logically? Realizing that spiritually however, becomes another matter. ;)
 

ecco

Veteran Member
"Virtually all modern scholars of antiquity agree that Jesus existed historically,"

Jesus - Wikipedia

Gee, at least quote the entire sentence...

...although the quest for the historical Jesus has yielded some uncertainty on the historical reliability of the Gospels and on how closely the Jesus portrayed in the Bible reflects the historical Jesus, as the only records of Jesus' life are contained in the Gospels.
... then we would see that "the only records of Jesus' life are contained in the Gospels" and there is "some uncertainty on the historical reliability of the Gospels".

Many people also believed that King Arthur and the Knights of the round table were real. As researchers got over their lifelong beliefs, they have come to find that those stories are myths.

Many people also believed that a large group of Hebrews really did trek across the desert for many years. As researchers got over their lifelong beliefs, they have come to find that that story is a myth.

It takes a long time for even honest researchers to overcome lifelong beliefs. But, as your linked wiki article clearly states: the only records of Jesus' life are contained in the Gospels. Biblical scholars have already discarded the notions that MML&J really heard, saw, and recorded the actual words of Jesus. That was just another of the dominoes to fall. Biblical scholars now accept that none of Jesus' quoted actions and comments can be attributed to firsthand eyewitness accounts. The rest of the dominoes will fall once scholars come to terms with the acceptance of the facts versus their long-held, indoctrinated beliefs. It may take several lifetimes.

Fred Hoyle never accepted an expanding universe.
Einstein never really accepted the quantum world.

I do recognize that it is pretty impossible to prove that someone did not exist 2000 years ago. However, evidence for his existence is constantly eroding.
 
Top