Was Jesus aware of being Yahweh?

[Greatest I am]

Was Jesus aware of being Yahweh?

I have wondered how Christians rationalized Jesus' last words --- "My God, my God, why have you forsaken me?"

Jesus seems unaware that he was God.

What did Jesus mean by forsaken?

The usual definition means abandoned or deserted.

How can one abandon or desert themselves?

If Jesus knew he was Yahweh, how did he feel about the poor reputation the Jews gave Yahweh?

Is that why the Jews tried to kill Jesus more than once before the cross got him?

Further.

Jesus also said that he and god were one, yet scriptures seem to show Jesus as Yahweh’s good side and Yahweh as the evil side.

If Jesus/Yahweh shared the some consciousness, which they would have to given that there is only one god in Christianity, why are they so different?

Regards
DL

[iambiguous]

How about this: When he returns, we'll ask him.

[Greatest I am]

How about this: When he returns, we'll ask him.

We will wait forever.

Regards
DL

[iambiguous]

How about this: When he returns, we'll ask him.

We will wait forever.

Regards
DL

Tell them that.

[felix dakat]

Based on historical analysis of the New Testament texts, it's doubtful that Jesus considered himself to be God.

[iambiguous]

Based on historical analysis of the New Testament texts, it's doubtful that Jesus considered himself to be God.

This can get tricky: https://www.npr.org/transcripts/300246095

In other words, even among those "deep thinkers" who take things like this seriously.

Me, I still need actual hard evidence that God -- any God -- does in fact exist. After all, how on earth could that not be both the starting point and the bottom line for quandaries such as this?

[felix dakat]

Based on historical analysis of the New Testament texts, it's doubtful that Jesus considered himself to be God.

This can get tricky: https://www.npr.org/transcripts/300246095

In other words, even among those "deep thinkers" who take things like this seriously.

Me, I still need actual hard evidence that God -- any God -- does in fact exist. After all, how on earth could that not be both the starting point and the bottom line for quandaries such as this?

From the interview you linked:

EHRMAN: Well, what I argue in the book is that during his lifetime, Jesus himself didn't call himself God and didn't consider himself God and that none of his disciples had any inkling at all that he was God.

That completely supports what I said above.

[iambiguous]

Based on historical analysis of the New Testament texts, it's doubtful that Jesus considered himself to be God.

This can get tricky: https://www.npr.org/transcripts/300246095

In other words, even among those "deep thinkers" who take things like this seriously.

Me, I still need actual hard evidence that God -- any God -- does in fact exist. After all, how on earth could that not be both the starting point and the bottom line for quandaries such as this?

From the interview you linked:

EHRMAN: Well, what I argue in the book is that during his lifetime, Jesus himself didn't call himself God and didn't consider himself God and that none of his disciples had any inkling at all that he was God.

That completely supports what I said above.

Okay, but there's still this part:

Me, I still need actual hard evidence that God -- any God -- does in fact exist. After all, how on earth could that not be both the starting point and the bottom line for quandaries such as this?

[felix dakat]

Okay, but there's still this part:

Me, I still need actual hard evidence that God -- any God -- does in fact exist. After all, how on earth could that not be both the starting point and the bottom line for quandaries such as this?

"God"...what does that even mean?

[Greatest I am]

Based on historical analysis of the New Testament texts, it's doubtful that Jesus considered himself to be God.

Biblical historians know that it is all myth, but yes, a reading of scriptures show that Jesus did not believe in a supernatural god.

There is some ambiguity in what the Rome created Jesus taught.

The Gnostic Christian Jesus that the church forgot to purge from scriptures was definitely showing that the only god we can know is within us.

He asked the Jews, have ye forgotten that ye are gods? Many had and some still did not get it.

Regards
DL

[iambiguous]

Okay, but there's still this part:

Me, I still need actual hard evidence that God -- any God -- does in fact exist. After all, how on earth could that not be both the starting point and the bottom line for quandaries such as this?

"God"...what does that even mean?

Indeed. That's the part I construe as being embedded/embodied existentially in dasein.

But here's the thing. With both morality on this side of the grave, and immortality on the other side at stake, wouldn't it seem reasonable to expect that the Christian God would make it abundantly clear what it does mean to worship and adore Him?

True, I don't know if, on Judgment Day, Christians damn well better know if Jesus Christ was aware of being Yahweh, but, well, how do we determine if it is important that they do?

[Greatest I am]

[

Indeed. That's the part I construe as being embedded/embodied existentially in dasein.

But here's the thing. With both morality on this side of the grave, and immortality on the other side at stake, wouldn't it seem reasonable to expect that the Christian God would make it abundantly clear what it does mean to worship and adore Him?

True, I don't know if, on Judgment Day, Christians damn well better know if Jesus Christ was aware of being Yahweh, but, well, how do we determine if it is important that they do?

If Christians put Jesus above Yahweh, which they have done, they break the first commandment.

Christians deny that, but you will note, that churches are full of Jesus iconography and very little of Yahweh.

Regards
DL

[iambiguous]

If Christians put Jesus above Yahweh, which they have done, they break the first commandment.

Christians deny that, but you will note, that churches are full of Jesus iconography and very little of Yahweh.

Regards
DL

Let's just say that until someone is able to convince me that Jesus and Yahweh actually did/do exist -- and I once believed that they did/do -- it really doesn't matter much what others think their relationship was.

But that's just me.

Here and now.

[felix dakat]

Indeed. That's the part I construe as being embedded/embodied existentially in dasein.

But here's the thing. With both morality on this side of the grave, and immortality on the other side at stake, wouldn't it seem reasonable to expect that the Christian God would make it abundantly clear what it does mean to worship and adore Him?

True, I don't know if, on Judgment Day, Christians damn well better know if Jesus Christ was aware of being Yahweh, but, well, how do we determine if it is important that they do?

Your demand for certainty seems to be at odds with reality.

[Greatest I am]

If Christians put Jesus above Yahweh, which they have done, they break the first commandment.

Christians deny that, but you will note, that churches are full of Jesus iconography and very little of Yahweh.

Regards
DL

Let's just say that until someone is able to convince me that Jesus and Yahweh actually did/do exist -- and I once believed that they did/do -- it really doesn't matter much what others think their relationship was.

But that's just me.

Here and now.

Ditto on the foolish belief without evidence.

Even if Yahweh was shown to be real, --- as a moral man, --- I have a bullet with his vile name on it.

Regards
DL

[felix dakat]

If Christians put Jesus above Yahweh, which they have done, they break the first commandment.

Christians deny that, but you will note, that churches are full of Jesus iconography and very little of Yahweh.

Regards
DL

Let's just say that until someone is able to convince me that Jesus and Yahweh actually did/do exist -- and I once believed that they did/do -- it really doesn't matter much what others think their relationship was.

But that's just me.

Here and now.

Yeah it's good that you qualified that your response is just about you. Because for billions of people in the world Jesus has important historic and symbolic significance regardless of whether there is such a being as whatever you conceive God to be. The problem is while you say that your stupid evaluation of the situation is just about you, here you are trying to promote your way of seeing things on a philosophical forum. You don't see that you contradict yourself every time you do that. The problem is with other people from your narcissistic point of view. Here's a suggestion: don't keep it up.

[iambiguous]

Yeah it's good that you qualified that your response is just about you. Because for billions of people in the world Jesus has important historic and symbolic significance regardless of whether there is such a being as whatever you conceive God to be. The problem is while you say that your stupid evaluation of the situation is just about you, here you are trying to promote your way of seeing things on a philosophical forum. You don't see that you contradict yourself every time you do that. The problem is with other people from your narcissistic point of view. Here's a suggestion: don't keep it up.

I always do. In regard to value judgments [re the OP and others] I construe my point of view as an existential contraption rooted subjectively in dasein. Then I ask objectivists of various ilk to note how that is not the case with them.

Instead...

Because for billions of people in the world Jesus has important historic and symbolic significance regardless of whether there is such a being as whatever you conceive God to be.

As with my own frame of mind, however, I am not interested in what others believe "in their head" is true about Jesus and God, I'm interested in what either "I" or they can demonstrate is in fact true about them. As this relates to the behaviors we choose on this side of the grave as that relates to what we anticipate our fate to be on the other side.

You know, the part that you and your ilk avoid like the covid-19.

The problem is while you say that your stupid evaluation of the situation is just about you, here you are trying to promote your way of seeing things on a philosophical forum. You don't see that you contradict yourself every time you do that. The problem is with other people from your narcissistic point of view. Here's a suggestion: don't keep it up.

Again, let's focus in on the assessments of a particular context involving conflicting religious denominations. I can convey my evaluation of it and you can point out in much greater detail how and why it is "stupid". How I "contradict" myself here in a philosophy forum. Why I am a "narcissist" in providing my own assessment.

While I point out a few things about you.

Note to others:

Shame him into actually taking me up on this.

[felix dakat]

Yeah it's good that you qualified that your response is just about you. Because for billions of people in the world Jesus has important historic and symbolic significance regardless of whether there is such a being as whatever you conceive God to be. The problem is while you say that your stupid evaluation of the situation is just about you, here you are trying to promote your way of seeing things on a philosophical forum. You don't see that you contradict yourself every time you do that. The problem is with other people from your narcissistic point of view. Here's a suggestion: don't keep it up.

I always do. In regard to value judgments [re the OP and others] I construe my point of view as an existential contraption rooted subjectively in dasein. Then I ask objectivists of various ilk to note how that is not the case with them.

Instead...

Because for billions of people in the world Jesus has important historic and symbolic significance regardless of whether there is such a being as whatever you conceive God to be.

As with my own frame of mind, however, I am not interested in what others believe "in their head" is true about Jesus and God, I'm interested in what either "I" or they can demonstrate is in fact true about them. As this relates to the behaviors we choose on this side of the grave as that relates to what we anticipate our fate to be on the other side.

You know, the part that you and your ilk avoid like the covid-19.

The problem is while you say that your stupid evaluation of the situation is just about you, here you are trying to promote your way of seeing things on a philosophical forum. You don't see that you contradict yourself every time you do that. The problem is with other people from your narcissistic point of view. Here's a suggestion: don't keep it up.

Again, let's focus in on the assessments of a particular context involving conflicting religious denominations. I can convey my evaluation of it and you can point out in much greater detail how and why it is "stupid". How I "contradict" myself here in a philosophy forum. Why I am a "narcissist" in providing my own assessment.

While I point out a few things about you.

Note to others:

Shame him into actually taking me up on this.

Right. You're not interested in the phenomenal world. You're only interested in a narrow little debunking agenda based on a paper thin set of assumptions you took away from your failed superficial understanding of religion. You don't profit from reason from any other point of view despite the attempts of many well-meaning intelligent persons on this website. I say this for the benefit of others. You have repeatedly demonstrated that dialogue with you is a waste of time.

[iambiguous]

Again, let's focus in on the assessments of a particular context involving conflicting religious denominations. I can convey my evaluation of it and you can point out in much greater detail how and why it is "stupid". How I "contradict" myself here in a philosophy forum. Why I am a "narcissist" in providing my own assessment.

While I point out a few things about you.

Right. You're not interested in the phenomenal world. You're only interested in a narrow little debunking agenda based on a paper thin set of assumptions you took away from your failed superficial understanding of religion. You don't profit from reason from any other point of view despite the attempts of many well-meaning intelligent persons on this website. I say this for the benefit of others. You have repeatedly demonstrated that dialogue with you is a waste of time.

Note to others:

Can you fucking believe this?!

Wiggle, wiggle, wiggle.

What on earth does it have to do with my challenge above?

I doubt even KT would defend it. And he's Curly now.

[felix dakat]

Again, let's focus in on the assessments of a particular context involving conflicting religious denominations. I can convey my evaluation of it and you can point out in much greater detail how and why it is "stupid". How I "contradict" myself here in a philosophy forum. Why I am a "narcissist" in providing my own assessment.

While I point out a few things about you.

Right. You're not interested in the phenomenal world. You're only interested in a narrow little debunking agenda based on a paper thin set of assumptions you took away from your failed superficial understanding of religion. You don't profit from reason from any other point of view despite the attempts of many well-meaning intelligent persons on this website. I say this for the benefit of others. You have repeatedly demonstrated that dialogue with you is a waste of time.

Note to others:

Can you fucking believe this?!

Wiggle, wiggle, wiggle.

What on earth does it have to do with my challenge above?

I doubt even KT would defend it. And he's Curly now.

What do you imagine I'm wiggling from ? I have nothing to do with the objectivist viewpoint you imagine yourself arguing against. You haven't shown a glimmer of comprehension of my position. Your arrogant ignorance and stupidity has well earned my contempt. Whereas, your nihilism is typical of the degraded mindset of the age. I know you. You are an infection I have overcome.

[iambiguous]

What do you imagine I'm wiggling from?

From this of course:

Again, let's focus in on the assessments of a particular context involving conflicting religious denominations. I can convey my evaluation of it and you can point out in much greater detail how and why it is "stupid". How I "contradict" myself here in a philosophy forum. Why I am a "narcissist" in providing my own assessment.

You are an infection I have overcome.

So, you are acknowledging that you once were infected?

Cite a few examples of what [existentially] you mean by this.

And, which, again, is precisely why we need to explore it through an examination of our respective reactions to conflicting goods embedded in a particular context relating to conflicting religious denominations. And then in relationship to my own No God perspective.