What was the Death of Jesus about?

[Trailblazer]

If you have to show me from a video of the internet and not the bible, this shows its not supported by the bible .

That won't fly....
The Bible verses and how they were fulfilled by Baha'u'llah are on the video. If you took 10 minutes to watch it you would see that.

 

[Trailblazer]

John 14
1¶Let not your heart be troubled: ye believe in God, believe also in me.

2In my Father's house are many mansions: if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you.

3And if I go and prepare a place for you, i will come again , and receive you unto myself; that where I am, there ye may be also.

4And whither I go ye know, and the way ye know.

Jesus is not coming back to earth again. I already proved that to you using your own Bible verses:
(John 14:19, John 17:11, John 17:4, John 19:30)

Now let's look at what John 13:2-3 means.

John 14:2-3 In my Father's house are many mansions: if it were not so, I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you. And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again, and receive you unto myself; that where I am, there ye may be also.

Jesus said He would come again, but Jesus did not say ‘how’ He would come so there is no reason to think this one verse is Jesus saying He will come to earth again in the same physical body He had when He walked the earth 2,000 years ago.

When Jesus said “I will come again” He was not referring to His physical body coming again. Jesus said that His work was finished here and He was no more in the world: (John 14:19, John 17:4, John 17:11).

Since Jesus said He was no more in the world and the world would see Him no more we know that when He said "and receive you unto myself" He was not talking about His physical body, but rather He was referring to His spirit. Also please note that Jesus did not ever say He would come again and ‘do’ anything on earth that would require a body, like building a Kingdom of God on earth, as most Christians believe Jesus will do.

"and receive you unto myself" is obviously about the Spirit of Jesus, not about His physical body, because there would be no way that the disciples Jesus was speaking to could receive the body of Jesus on earth since they were no longer living on earth. Where Jesus was in heaven and that is where the disciples also are, so that is where Jesus received them. That is why Jesus said that He went to prepare a place for them, a place in heaven, not on earth.

The spirit of Jesus did come again, in the Person of Baha'u'llah who was the return of Christ that Jesus promised. So when Jesus said “I will come again” He meant that His Spirit would come again because He would send His Spirit from the Father, and we see that in the verses that follow in John 14. Jesus promised not to leave us comfortless and then He said He would send a Comforter. The Comforter refers to the person who would be the return of Christ. So when Jesus said I will come again, He meant He would send His spirit in the person of the Comforter who would do what it says in John 14:26.

John 14 KJV

18 I will not leave you comfortless: I will come to you.
19 Yet a little while, and the world seeth me no more; but ye see me: because I live, ye shall live also.
20 At that day ye shall know that I am in my Father, and ye in me, and I in you.
25 These things have I spoken unto you, being yet present with you.
26 But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.
27 Peace I leave with you, my peace I give unto you: not as the world giveth, give I unto you. Let not your heart be troubled, neither let it be afraid.
28 Ye have heard how I said unto you, I go away, and come again unto you. If ye loved me, ye would rejoice, because I said, I go unto the Father: for my Father is greater than I.
29 And now I have told you before it come to pass, that, when it is come to pass, ye might believe.

"and receive you unto myself; that where I am, there ye may be also” is referring to heaven, not earth, because Jesus was going to heaven to prepare a place in heaven, not on earth. Jesus was preparing a place in heaven so they could be with him in heaven.

John 14:3 is one of the most misunderstood verses in the New Testament so it is no wonder the Bible commentaries do not agree on what it means.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

To summarize, Jesus did not say "my body will come again." The spirit of Jesus did come again, in the Person of Baha'u'llah, and that was what Jesus promised to send. Jesus was a Comforter who brought the Holy Spirit and Baha’u’llah was another Comforter who brought the Holy Spirit.

John 14:16-17 And I will pray the Father, and he shall give you another Comforter, that he may abide with you for ever; Even the Spirit of truth; whom the world cannot receive, because it seeth him not, neither knoweth him: but ye know him; for he dwelleth with you, and shall be in you.

John 14:26 But the Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, whom the Father will send in my name, he shall teach you all things, and bring all things to your remembrance, whatsoever I have said unto you.

 

[Trailblazer]

Your sticking to this ,not through a sound reading of the bible are you ? Because its literally impossible to read the NT and come to that conclusion.

What is impossible is to read the NT and come to the conclusion that the same man Jesus is ever going to return to earth. Not once in the NT did Jesus ever say He was coming back to earth. Give it up for lost. You have been duped by Christianity. Jesus is never coming back to earth.

 

[Trailblazer]

' No longer in the world ' does not mean he doesn't return .

John 17:11 And now I am no more in the world, but these are in the world, and I come to thee. Holy Father, keep through thine own name those whom thou hast given me, that they may be one, as we are.

No more in the world means Jesus will never again be in the world. That means Jesus will not return to the world.

no more
phrase of more

1. nothing further.
   "there was no more to be said about it"
2. no further.
   "you must have some soup, but no more wine"
3. exist no longer.
   "the patch of ground was overgrown and the hut was no more"
4. never again.
   "mention his name no more to me"
5. neither.
   "I had no complaints and no more did Tom"

Translate no more to
Definitions from Oxford Languages

 

[F1fan]

The Universal Father inhabits the circle of infinity. What time would it ever be to God?

It would be all time all the time. It would have awareness of all time simultaneously, supposedly. Of course your claims are not factual, but I appreciate you making guesses for us.

God delegates creative powers and authority to his Sons who in turn manage their own created worlds.

Sons? More than one? Well that's juicy gossip.

 

[paarsurrey]

Close enough, yes ─ given an historical Jesus, it looks like he was chiefly concerned about the End Times, the establishment of the Kingdom on earth within a few years of his preaching (following John the Baptist). How much of the rest eg the Sermon on the Mount, is from sayings of his is hard to state with any confidence ─ the history of the Jesus Seminar shows the difficulty,

Paul (including Paul's associates and the Church) selected 4-Gospels with the primary purpose of making Jesus-God all the rest creeds had been made subservient to this purpose. Right?

Regards

 

[Colt]

It would be all time all the time. It would have awareness of all time simultaneously, supposedly. Of course your claims are not factual, but I appreciate you making guesses for us.


Sons? More than one? Well that's juicy gossip.

Why isn’t my claim factual? The creator of time isn’t subject to it.

Adam was himself a Son of God.

 

[blü 2]

The Jews developed wrong ideas about a Messiah and a material kingdom. Jesus was a spiritual teacher who taught a spiritual kingdom.

You jest, surely? You're going to tell the Jews what a messiah is? No, the Christian idea of Jesus as messiah is a purely Christian invention.

You keep saying that Jesus came to be killed, that's simply not true.

Of course it's true. I set some of the statements out in the OP. Jesus says at the start of his mission that he's to die. Jesus at the end of his mission in all the gospels rejects chances to escape. He dies because he wants to.

If Jesus vanished on his own then his message may have been lost.

That couldn't happen with a benevolent omnipotent God overseeing proceedings.

The resurrection was his last and most spectacular miracle which provided a huge boost to the faith of the apostles. Some of the apostles gave up their lives as well and many more Christians.

The evidence for the resurrection, as I've pointed out elsewhere in this thread, is of abysmal quality, a forensic disaster. You couldn't renew a dog license with evidence of that quality ─ no eyewitness, no contemporary reference, no independent reference, first mention more than 20 years after the event, first substantial report with empty tomb 45 years on, first report to specify a resurrected Jesus 55 years on, six accounts in all and every one of them contradicting the other five in major ways. And that's without mentioning that supernatural claims aren't credible anyway and demand an extraordinarily high level of demonstration to overcome that hurdle.

 

[blü 2]

A part of this i see ,demonstrates who he is , his love, mercy and glory . I'm just grateful he did .

Noted.

 

[Rival]

The bible warns of the 'one ' that all the worlds religions are looking for to come .

My religion has no such figure. Nor have the Hellenic, Heathen, or many other Pagan paths.

 

[blü 2]

Free movie on Tubi.

The God Who Speaks

Speed it up to the 31:00 minute mark:

"When you think about where the New Testament came from It came out of Judaism. Why would these Jewish believers, who thought they were God's chosen people, why would they invent a resurrected Jesus? What motivation would they have for that? Why would they invent this? It makes no sense at all.​

Why would the Christians invent the Trinity? Eastern Orthodoxy? Protestantism? Mormonism? Rastafarianism? End up as thousands of Christian sects?​

"I mean if one of them said: "Hey we're gonna start a new religion. And one of the others said: "We are? Yeah, what's it gonna get us? Well, first of all we're gonna get kicked out of the Synagogue. And then we're gonna get beaten, tortured and killed. Do you think the other guy's gonna go: "hey great idea, sign me up.

"There's NO motivation for JEWS to have invented a resurrected Jesus.​

​

I'm sure the small number of Jews who were proto-Christians would be as good at devising reasons as Christians have been in devising each of their own sects.

​

 

[blü 2]

Isn't your post 'What was the Death of Jesus about?'

Indeed.

To quote my OP ─

The first question is:
WHY was it necessary for Jesus to die?

What could the death of Jesus achieve that an almighty God could not have achieved without bloodshed, just with one snap of those omnipotent fingers?

The second question is:
WHAT did Jesus’ death actually achieve? What, specifically, was different afterwards, that wasn’t so before?

The third question is:
Since God had made [his] covenant with the Jews, and was the God of the Jewish nation, and the only God, and had never needed an intermediary,
why would God suddenly need an intermediary in the first century CE?

And if we ever get a cogent answer to the first question, we can move on to the other two.

 

[blü 2]

Paul (including Paul's associates and the Church) selected 4-Gospels with the primary purpose of making Jesus-God all the rest creeds had been made subservient to this purpose. Right?

No, Paul was apparently dead by 60 CE. The first gospel, Mark, is about 75 CE, Matthew and Luke mid 80s CE, John mid or latter 90s CE.

Paul's letters aren't in evidence until the mid 2nd century, brought to attention by followers of Marcion in his arguments with other Christians, to support his gnostic views. (The gospel of John has gnostic elements too.) There's a school of thought that Paul's letters were invented by followers of Marcion, though my own view is that it's highly improbable anyone would have invented an ─ ahm ─ eccentric character like Paul.

 

[Colt]

You jest, surely? You're going to tell the Jews what a messiah is? No, the Christian idea of Jesus as messiah is a purely Christian invention.
Of course it's true. I set some of the statements out in the OP. Jesus says at the start of his mission that he's to die. Jesus at the end of his mission in all the gospels rejects chances to escape. He dies because he wants to.
That couldn't happen with a benevolent omnipotent God overseeing proceedings. The evidence for the resurrection, as I've pointed out elsewhere in this thread, is of abysmal quality, a forensic disaster. You couldn't renew a dog license with evidence of that quality ─ no eyewitness, no contemporary reference, no independent reference, first mention more than 20 years after the event, first substantial report with empty tomb 45 years on, first report to specify a resurrected Jesus 55 years on, six accounts in all and every one of them contradicting the other five in major ways. And that's without mentioning that supernatural claims aren't credible anyway and demand an extraordinarily high level of demonstration to overcome that hurdle.

No, I’m not telling the Jews what their Messiah is, I saying that Jesus WASNT the Jewish Messiah. The Jews developed their own ideas that Jesus simply could not fit. The coming of the Son had been foreseen before Judaism existed. The Gospel of Jesus was for ALL the world from the beginning. The Jews were not going to share Yahweh with the Gentile world.

Jesus came to realize that his message would be rejected and his body killed. He allowed it.

 

[rational experiences]

Science argues the bible.

Humans were not created by any science theme.

If a human lived and wrote a new document and assessed and compared a previous existing science document they did. Proven by use numbers.

Numbers is a science condition.

Historic. Jewish experience.

New historic as you cannot write about physical causes reactive changes seen witnessed until it occurs.

Two histories of supernatural witness.

Human alive witnessing.
Human alive suffering.

Separate incidences.

If I were logical I would be angry and angered at the new attack on life.

If you live family...spirit life and existing.

Common sense would own that status.

Angered that it occurred again.

Attack and sacrifice of life. Witnessed. Human survival to write a witness historic. After the fact.

Reason Rome was involved in life's harm. Next moment Rome supports the reasoning life sacrificed.

Reason to be angered at new documentation.

Attack on life....
Ended.
Finished.
Stopped.
Occurred.

History.

Words scientist claiming it is science constants should realise you are lying.

If a previous held tomb with a spirit in it then says the spirit released. Then it was gone. Removed. Was not put back so it is not science.

To thesis earth God body reactions in secrecy.


.

 

[Colt]

It’s interesting to note that “3 wise men” or Magi from another country in the East had been informed of the coming of the Son. Not 3 Jews from Israel.

 

[blü 2]

It’s interesting to note that “3 wise men” or Magi from another country in the East had been informed of the coming of the Son. Not 3 Jews from Israel.

it's unfortunate for the credibility of that story that it occurs in Matthew, some of whose manifest flights of fancy I've already referred to in this thread.

If you proceed on the basis that the three wise men are a fiction, you won't go far wrong.

 

[rational experiences]

It’s interesting to note that “3 wise men” or Magi from another country in the East had been informed of the coming of the Son. Not 3 Jews from Israel.

Old men psychic lived as the wise.

Spiritual and aware. Bodily affected by life. To allow a different awareness. To exist to live to age. Wisdom advice psychic.

If they knew just by being human alive to think to feel and shared advice spiritually for family for continued life of family like the Baha'i message did. Then obviously humans were first made aware of changes.

Philosophers were conscious psychic and learned.

In my life the living and lived and deceased father messages advise me.

Three natural lived man scientist human conditions affected by his evil nuclear occult heavenly changes.

What was stated. By humans for human advice.

Father life. Son life. Holy heavenly ghost host gases existing advice.

Aware conscious science theist.

I know I am no Mr know it all. I am female hearing it said.

Father said God the earth converted and made sin holes to its owned body in sun conversion. A long time ago.

Theism history thought about for human sciences. How to convert earths mass.

No radiation existed in life converting God earth mass known.

They had to invent it. The conditions.

Knew it was dangerous.

Implemented machine pyramid water pump transmitted to via his temples in mountains and on mount. Schematics cooling atmospheric transmissions he thought.

Transmitting signals a wrong choice proved when pyramids toppled the casement blew off and the temple mountains struck blew up by ark UFO radiation.

Never controlled was just cooled for a while like you do today limiting UFO radiation released out of God. Implementing water cooling differently. Having learnt so your mind says.

Thinking life safe whilst you sacrifice it killing it slowly before life is meant to die.

Scientific theme thought memories about life state as I heard claimed in male life in sciences.....was going to die anyway so who cares mentality.

Real. A true science greedy man thought agreement. As long as it is not their life.

Rome learnt their lesson. Said scientist was a criminal their own selves. Why they got jailed.

Typical condition of hierarchy to agree until their life gets harmed.

We are after all mutual in our living conditions human in equal gods owned spirits.

Science studied biology claiming harmed life equalled radiation levels they agreed to cause lied as DNA is forwarded by human sex not radiation conditions.

 

[F1fan]

Why isn’t my claim factual? The creator of time isn’t subject to it.

A creator/God is not known to exist outside of human imagination so no one can refer to these ideas as if factual.

Adam was himself a Son of God.

I guess you could say all humans are sons and daughters of God if you are liberal enough in your interpretation.

 

[rational experiences]

Any human anywhere on earth is a human psychic awAre.

Humans invented science conditions machine.

Science thesis however said science came originally from out of space.

Change can therefore occur anywhere for psyche aware warnings.

In the east awAre can also claim a temple or mountain was attacked to be notified science is wrong.

Human reasoning science began as a chosen man self righteous act.

Only another human would tell you why you are wrong.