God and the suffering of Jesus

[BluePhantom]

So I have been thinking a lot about God and the crucifixion. For the sake of this question let's assume that Jesus was God or at the very least God resided within Jesus through the Holy Spirit during His ministry. It creates a question about God suffering at the hands of man through Jesus. This was a really big issue in early Christianity and one of the reasons why there were so many different forms of Christianity in the early church.

The question was "if Jesus was God, and Jesus suffered at the hands of man, did man cause God to physically suffer as well?" There was a lot of debate. Some said that Jesus was God, but his physical form was merely an illusion and therefore God did not suffer because you can't harm an illusion. Some apocryphal gospels even depict Jesus as laughing during the crucifixion to really make this point stick. Some said that God entered Jesus either at birth or at his baptism by John the Baptist and left Jesus before His death to avoid the suffering. The thought here was that man cannot possibly harm God so God must have left before any actual harm befell Jesus. Still others argued that Jesus was God and the whole point was for God to experience what it was to be a man. Therefore, God suffered all the same pains and agonies as Jesus did during the passion and crucifixion.

As a point of Biblical history, these schools of thought (as well as others) created rivalries and completely separate branches of early Christianity such as the Gnostics, Ebinonites, Marcionites, proto-orthodox, etc. There were tons of them. To some degree all those different points of view remain within different branches of Christianity.

So I ask this question because I am interested in what most people think of have been taught. I know my point of view on this, but I am very curious to see what others think. For those who are atheist...yeah we already know your point of view. Bugger off.

 

[ChrisL]

I always thought Jesus was God's son??? I've never heard that Jesus was God in human form. BTW, although I am agnostic, I am quite capable of having a rational discussion about the "theories."

 

[BluePhantom]

I always thought Jesus was God's son??? I've never heard that Jesus was God in human form. BTW, although I am agnostic, I am quite capable of having a rational discussion about the "theories."

Oh yes.....there are many schools of Christian thought now and in antiquity that argued that Jesus was God in human form and his purpose was to spread the word of God and to experience what man was going through for Himself.

 

[ChrisL]

I always thought Jesus was God's son??? I've never heard that Jesus was God in human form. BTW, although I am agnostic, I am quite capable of having a rational discussion about the "theories."

Oh yes.....there are many schools of Christian thought now and in antiquity that argued that Jesus was God in human form and his purpose was to spread the word of God and to experience what man was going through for Himself.

Well how can that be, considering the story of Mary and Joseph?

 

[ChrisL]

I picked the fourth option. If there is a God and there was a Jesus, that option makes the most sense to me. From everything I've learned (my mom was raised in the Catholic religion, Catholic schools, etc.), Jesus was God's son but a separate entity from God. In the Bible, while wearing the crown of thorns, Jesus cries out to God in a moment of weakness, "why has thou forsaken me, your son?"

 

[ChrisL]

Correction to my prior post. Apparently that event occurred while Jesus was on the cross. I apologize. I am going strictly by memory here.

Matthew 27 46 About three in the afternoon Jesus cried out in a loud voice Eli Eli lema sabachthani which means My God my God why have you forsaken me .

About the ninth hour Jesus cried out with a loud voice, saying, "ELI, ELI, LAMA SABACHTHANI?" that is, "MY GOD, MY GOD, WHY HAVE YOU FORSAKEN ME?"

 

[BluePhantom]

Correction to my prior post. Apparently that event occurred while Jesus was on the cross. I apologize. I am going strictly by memory here.

Matthew 27 46 About three in the afternoon Jesus cried out in a loud voice Eli Eli lema sabachthani which means My God my God why have you forsaken me .

About the ninth hour Jesus cried out with a loud voice, saying, "ELI, ELI, LAMA SABACHTHANI?" that is, "MY GOD, MY GOD, WHY HAVE YOU FORSAKEN ME?"

Well it depends on which gospel you read, but that quote has been used to argue that God left Jesus to avoid the suffering. Actually what Jesus is doing is quoting Psalm 22.

There is no right or wrong answer to this. No one knows. The Bible doesn't say and the only texts that takes a solid stance are apocryphal such as the Acts of Thomas which takes a very strong stance on the issue but that text was written for the purpose of addressing that question. So it's not the most objective point of view.

 

[Fat Bastardo]

The idea of Jesus being a sacrificial lamb is BS for many reasons.

God/Jesus is allegedly all knowing. Therefore he/God/Jesus knew the outcome of his crucifixion. Temporary death and then heaven. John 3:16 is a joke. God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son... This is also BS... God can have as many begotten sons as he wants and God being all knowing knew the outcome.

 

[BluePhantom]

I always thought Jesus was God's son??? I've never heard that Jesus was God in human form. BTW, although I am agnostic, I am quite capable of having a rational discussion about the "theories."

Oh yes.....there are many schools of Christian thought now and in antiquity that argued that Jesus was God in human form and his purpose was to spread the word of God and to experience what man was going through for Himself.

Well how can that be, considering the story of Mary and Joseph?

Well that created yet other schools of thought and other branches of Christianity in the early church. Some argued that Jesus was conceived through sexual intercourse between Mary and Joseph. Some argued that Mary conceived Jesus through the Holy Spirit, gave birth to Him and remained a virgin. Some said that after the birth of Jesus she had sex with Joseph. Others said that Mary was never pregnant at all. A light shown from her womb and from that light Jesus was created. There were tons of stories about it and each were embraced by different sects

 

[ChrisL]

Correction to my prior post. Apparently that event occurred while Jesus was on the cross. I apologize. I am going strictly by memory here.

Matthew 27 46 About three in the afternoon Jesus cried out in a loud voice Eli Eli lema sabachthani which means My God my God why have you forsaken me .

About the ninth hour Jesus cried out with a loud voice, saying, "ELI, ELI, LAMA SABACHTHANI?" that is, "MY GOD, MY GOD, WHY HAVE YOU FORSAKEN ME?"

Well it depends on which gospel you read, but that quote has been used to argue that God left Jesus to avoid the suffering. Actually what Jesus is doing is quoting Psalm 22.

There is no right or wrong answer to this. No one knows. The Bible doesn't say and the only texts that takes a solid stance are apocryphal such as the Acts of Thomas which takes a very strong stance on the issue but that text was written for the purpose of addressing that question. So it's not the most objective point of view.

Well, I don't really believe that God and Jesus were the same. I think Jesus was allegedly God's son and he was created to "absorb" our sins by suffering on the cross.

 

[BluePhantom]

The idea of Jesus being a sacrificial lamb is BS for many reasons.

God/Jesus is allegedly all knowing. Therefore he/God/Jesus knew the outcome of his crucifixion. Temporary death and then heaven. John 3:16 is a joke. God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son... This is also BS... God can have as many begotten sons as he wants and God being all knowing knew the outcome.

Go read the last line of the OP...especially the "bugger off" part.

 

[ChrisL]

I always thought Jesus was God's son??? I've never heard that Jesus was God in human form. BTW, although I am agnostic, I am quite capable of having a rational discussion about the "theories."

Oh yes.....there are many schools of Christian thought now and in antiquity that argued that Jesus was God in human form and his purpose was to spread the word of God and to experience what man was going through for Himself.

Well how can that be, considering the story of Mary and Joseph?

Well that created yet other schools of thought and other branches of Christianity in the early church. Some argued that Jesus was conceived through sexual intercourse between Mary and Joseph. Some argued that Mary conceived Jesus through the Holy Spirit, gave birth to Him and remained a virgin. Some said that after the birth of Jesus she had sex with Joseph. Others said that Mary was never pregnant at all. A light shown from her womb and from that light Jesus was created. There were tons of stories about it and each were embraced by different sects

I would think that it was the "immaculate conception" and since she was known as the "virgin Mary," then I think that tells us that Jesus was conceived through God's powers but not intercourse.

Of course like you said, nobody knows, and I'm just sharing my opinion.

 

[BluePhantom]

Correction to my prior post. Apparently that event occurred while Jesus was on the cross. I apologize. I am going strictly by memory here.

Matthew 27 46 About three in the afternoon Jesus cried out in a loud voice Eli Eli lema sabachthani which means My God my God why have you forsaken me .

About the ninth hour Jesus cried out with a loud voice, saying, "ELI, ELI, LAMA SABACHTHANI?" that is, "MY GOD, MY GOD, WHY HAVE YOU FORSAKEN ME?"

Well it depends on which gospel you read, but that quote has been used to argue that God left Jesus to avoid the suffering. Actually what Jesus is doing is quoting Psalm 22.

There is no right or wrong answer to this. No one knows. The Bible doesn't say and the only texts that takes a solid stance are apocryphal such as the Acts of Thomas which takes a very strong stance on the issue but that text was written for the purpose of addressing that question. So it's not the most objective point of view.

Well, I don't really believe that God and Jesus were the same. I think Jesus was allegedly God's son and he was created to "absorb" our sins by suffering on the cross.

Ok. I was looking for your opinion. Thank you for providing it.

 

[BluePhantom]

I always thought Jesus was God's son??? I've never heard that Jesus was God in human form. BTW, although I am agnostic, I am quite capable of having a rational discussion about the "theories."

Oh yes.....there are many schools of Christian thought now and in antiquity that argued that Jesus was God in human form and his purpose was to spread the word of God and to experience what man was going through for Himself.

Well how can that be, considering the story of Mary and Joseph?

Well that created yet other schools of thought and other branches of Christianity in the early church. Some argued that Jesus was conceived through sexual intercourse between Mary and Joseph. Some argued that Mary conceived Jesus through the Holy Spirit, gave birth to Him and remained a virgin. Some said that after the birth of Jesus she had sex with Joseph. Others said that Mary was never pregnant at all. A light shown from her womb and from that light Jesus was created. There were tons of stories about it and each were embraced by different sects

I would think that it was the "immaculate conception" and since she was known as the "virgin Mary," then I think that tells us that Jesus was conceived through God's powers but not intercourse.

Of course like you said, nobody knows, and I'm just sharing my opinion.

No no. The immaculate conception was the conception of Mary, not Jesus. According to that dogma, Mary was conceived through sexual intercourse but the "sin nature" did not pass to her. Thus she was born sinless and worthy to give birth to God. You said you learned about this from a Catholic. This is huge Catholic stuff here.

The conception of Jesus was the "virgin conception", not the immaculate conception

 

[ChrisL]

I always thought Jesus was God's son??? I've never heard that Jesus was God in human form. BTW, although I am agnostic, I am quite capable of having a rational discussion about the "theories."

Oh yes.....there are many schools of Christian thought now and in antiquity that argued that Jesus was God in human form and his purpose was to spread the word of God and to experience what man was going through for Himself.

Well how can that be, considering the story of Mary and Joseph?

Well that created yet other schools of thought and other branches of Christianity in the early church. Some argued that Jesus was conceived through sexual intercourse between Mary and Joseph. Some argued that Mary conceived Jesus through the Holy Spirit, gave birth to Him and remained a virgin. Some said that after the birth of Jesus she had sex with Joseph. Others said that Mary was never pregnant at all. A light shown from her womb and from that light Jesus was created. There were tons of stories about it and each were embraced by different sects

I would think that it was the "immaculate conception" and since she was known as the "virgin Mary," then I think that tells us that Jesus was conceived through God's powers but not intercourse.

Of course like you said, nobody knows, and I'm just sharing my opinion.

No no. The immaculate conception was the conception of Mary, not Jesus. According to that dogma, Mary was conceived through sexual intercourse but the "sin nature" did not pass to her. Thus she was born sinless and worthy to give birth to God. You said you learned about this from a Catholic. This is huge Catholic stuff here.

The conception of Jesus was the "virgin conception", not the immaculate conception

Right. That means she was not "tainted" so to speak, which would probably mean she was a virgin. Correct?

 

[ChrisL]

I always thought Jesus was God's son??? I've never heard that Jesus was God in human form. BTW, although I am agnostic, I am quite capable of having a rational discussion about the "theories."

Oh yes.....there are many schools of Christian thought now and in antiquity that argued that Jesus was God in human form and his purpose was to spread the word of God and to experience what man was going through for Himself.

Well how can that be, considering the story of Mary and Joseph?

Well that created yet other schools of thought and other branches of Christianity in the early church. Some argued that Jesus was conceived through sexual intercourse between Mary and Joseph. Some argued that Mary conceived Jesus through the Holy Spirit, gave birth to Him and remained a virgin. Some said that after the birth of Jesus she had sex with Joseph. Others said that Mary was never pregnant at all. A light shown from her womb and from that light Jesus was created. There were tons of stories about it and each were embraced by different sects

I would think that it was the "immaculate conception" and since she was known as the "virgin Mary," then I think that tells us that Jesus was conceived through God's powers but not intercourse.

Of course like you said, nobody knows, and I'm just sharing my opinion.

No no. The immaculate conception was the conception of Mary, not Jesus. According to that dogma, Mary was conceived through sexual intercourse but the "sin nature" did not pass to her. Thus she was born sinless and worthy to give birth to God. You said you learned about this from a Catholic. This is huge Catholic stuff here.

The conception of Jesus was the "virgin conception", not the immaculate conception

And if the conception of Jesus was the "virgin conception" then you just answered your own question!

 

[Fat Bastardo]

The idea of Jesus being a sacrificial lamb is BS for many reasons.

God/Jesus is allegedly all knowing. Therefore he/God/Jesus knew the outcome of his crucifixion. Temporary death and then heaven. John 3:16 is a joke. God so loved the world that he gave his only begotten son... This is also BS... God can have as many begotten sons as he wants and God being all knowing knew the outcome.

Go read the last line of the OP...especially the "bugger off" part.

I'm not an atheist. I believe God exists and I know that God is evil and needs to die.

 

[BluePhantom]

Oh yes.....there are many schools of Christian thought now and in antiquity that argued that Jesus was God in human form and his purpose was to spread the word of God and to experience what man was going through for Himself.

Well how can that be, considering the story of Mary and Joseph?

Well that created yet other schools of thought and other branches of Christianity in the early church. Some argued that Jesus was conceived through sexual intercourse between Mary and Joseph. Some argued that Mary conceived Jesus through the Holy Spirit, gave birth to Him and remained a virgin. Some said that after the birth of Jesus she had sex with Joseph. Others said that Mary was never pregnant at all. A light shown from her womb and from that light Jesus was created. There were tons of stories about it and each were embraced by different sects

I would think that it was the "immaculate conception" and since she was known as the "virgin Mary," then I think that tells us that Jesus was conceived through God's powers but not intercourse.

Of course like you said, nobody knows, and I'm just sharing my opinion.

No no. The immaculate conception was the conception of Mary, not Jesus. According to that dogma, Mary was conceived through sexual intercourse but the "sin nature" did not pass to her. Thus she was born sinless and worthy to give birth to God. You said you learned about this from a Catholic. This is huge Catholic stuff here.

The conception of Jesus was the "virgin conception", not the immaculate conception

Right. That means she was not "tainted" so to speak, which would probably mean she was a virgin. Correct?

Well again it would depend on who you asked in antiquity. That's actually a very interesting topic because it appears that the authors of Mark and Matthew were reading from the Septuagint (the first Greek version of the Hebrew Bible) and there is confusion between the Hebrew word used and the Greek word used. They don't quite mean the same thing. The Hebrew word "almah" could mean "virgin", "young woman" or "woman who had not gone through the final phase of marriage" (there were like 13 or 14 of them and the man had sexual rights to his betrothed after the first one although she would be considered an "almah" until the completion of the last one).

Trying to translate that to Greek was a bit of a pain because they didn't have a word that meant the same thing so they used the word "parthenos" which means "virgin" because it was the closest they could come up with. So when the authors of Matthew and Luke read it in Greek they saw "parthenos" and took it for what parthenos meant. A virgin. But that's not quite what it means in Hebrew.

In the early Christian church all these different points of view were in competition for converts and they all had different beliefs. Many of them radically different. According to research by Walter Bauer, which is mostly accepted by scholarship although not completely, it was the view of the church at Rome that won out and the rest were banished by pain of death. So that's what comes to us today. The Christianity we see today is not necessarily the original version, nor the version that was the majority opinion in antiquity. It was the view that won the war and got adopted by Constantine and Theodosius.

So to answer your question, she was not tainted, but that is only according to the proto-orthodox view of early Christianity and we take it for granted because it's the view that survived into the Middle Ages and destroyed all the other views.

Does any of that make sense?

 

[ChrisL]

Well how can that be, considering the story of Mary and Joseph?

Well that created yet other schools of thought and other branches of Christianity in the early church. Some argued that Jesus was conceived through sexual intercourse between Mary and Joseph. Some argued that Mary conceived Jesus through the Holy Spirit, gave birth to Him and remained a virgin. Some said that after the birth of Jesus she had sex with Joseph. Others said that Mary was never pregnant at all. A light shown from her womb and from that light Jesus was created. There were tons of stories about it and each were embraced by different sects

I would think that it was the "immaculate conception" and since she was known as the "virgin Mary," then I think that tells us that Jesus was conceived through God's powers but not intercourse.

Of course like you said, nobody knows, and I'm just sharing my opinion.

No no. The immaculate conception was the conception of Mary, not Jesus. According to that dogma, Mary was conceived through sexual intercourse but the "sin nature" did not pass to her. Thus she was born sinless and worthy to give birth to God. You said you learned about this from a Catholic. This is huge Catholic stuff here.

The conception of Jesus was the "virgin conception", not the immaculate conception

Right. That means she was not "tainted" so to speak, which would probably mean she was a virgin. Correct?

Well again it would depend on who you asked in antiquity. That's actually a very interesting topic because it appears that the authors of Mark and Matthew were reading from the Septuagint (the first Greek version of the Hebrew Bible) and there is confusion between the Hebrew word used and the Greek word used. They don't quite mean the same thing. The Hebrew word "almah" could mean "virgin", "young woman" or "woman who had not gone through the final phase of marriage" (there were like 13 or 14 of them and the man had sexual rights to his betrothed after the first one although she would be considered an "almah" until the completion of the last one).

Trying to translate that to Greek was a bit of a pain because they didn't have a word that meant the same thing so they used the word "parthenos" which means "virgin". So when the authors of Matthew and Luke read it in Greek they saw "parthenos" and took it for what parthenos meant. A virgin. But that's not quite what it means in Hebrew.

In the early Christian church all these different points of view were in competition for converts and they all had different beliefs. Many of them radically different. According to research by Walter Bauer, which is mostly accepted by scholarship although not completely, it was the view of the church at Rome that won out and the rest were banished by pain of death. So that's what comes to us today. The Christianity we see today is not necessarily the original version, nor the version that was the majority opinion in antiquity. It was the view that won the war and got adopted by Constantine and Theodosius.

So to answer your question, she was not tainted, but that is only according to the proto-orthodox view of early Christianity and we take it for granted because it's the view that survived into the Middle Ages and destroyed all the other views.

Does any of that make sense?

Yes, you are saying that it all depends upon the translation of the texts and different words, but I still think the theory that Mary was a virgin and was impregnated by God through supernatural means and not actually through sex and that Jesus is God's son, who God sacrificed for mankind makes most sense. This is what they teach in the Catholic church that my mother went to.

 

[BluePhantom]

Oh yes.....there are many schools of Christian thought now and in antiquity that argued that Jesus was God in human form and his purpose was to spread the word of God and to experience what man was going through for Himself.

Well how can that be, considering the story of Mary and Joseph?

Well that created yet other schools of thought and other branches of Christianity in the early church. Some argued that Jesus was conceived through sexual intercourse between Mary and Joseph. Some argued that Mary conceived Jesus through the Holy Spirit, gave birth to Him and remained a virgin. Some said that after the birth of Jesus she had sex with Joseph. Others said that Mary was never pregnant at all. A light shown from her womb and from that light Jesus was created. There were tons of stories about it and each were embraced by different sects

I would think that it was the "immaculate conception" and since she was known as the "virgin Mary," then I think that tells us that Jesus was conceived through God's powers but not intercourse.

Of course like you said, nobody knows, and I'm just sharing my opinion.

No no. The immaculate conception was the conception of Mary, not Jesus. According to that dogma, Mary was conceived through sexual intercourse but the "sin nature" did not pass to her. Thus she was born sinless and worthy to give birth to God. You said you learned about this from a Catholic. This is huge Catholic stuff here.

The conception of Jesus was the "virgin conception", not the immaculate conception

And if the conception of Jesus was the "virgin conception" then you just answered your own question!

Oh I am not saying that is MY view. That is the Catholic view and the view of most protestants