Why did Jesus preach an incomplete message?

Originally posted by Sump3
reply to post by Akragon

 

You might as well join in skipper

yup yup!

Spread the love brother... its our only chance in this world

reply to post by zadkiel


Thanks for the link, but what am I supposed to be looking for exactly?

I'd like to know where they got this information from, especially Bartholomew and Simon the Zealot, who very very little is known about.

reply to post by 3NL1GHT3N3D1

. . . who very very little is known about.

You should try reading through the Gospel of John to see how many of Jesus' disciples are named.
It is 8, I had to look it up on Wikipedia because I forgot.
en.wikipedia.org...

reply to post by jmdewey60


I have read all the gospels, and the information in this urantia book doesn't seem to be very genuine in my opinion. Seems like they just made the stories/characterizations up, but that's just me.

reply to post by 3NL1GHT3N3D1

Seems like they just made the stories

My understanding of what the Urantia book is, coming from 38 years of listening to conspiracy radio shows, is that it was commissioned by the Rockefellers back when they came up with a scheme to create a religion where one of the family members could be eventually proclaimed Messiah, based on certain things built into the book.

reply to post by 3NL1GHT3N3D1


That's not any evidence to me, you are speculating too much in the hope to discredit Jesus when we are still going to be talking about him for another 2,000 years because he was a real being. Yet in the day of Jesus he didn't want anyone to write down his teachings as if he wanted to be part of the ancient Jewish scriptures. Jesus was mysterious just as much as he was wise. I doubt he would give deep explanations for the miracles, he just made simple quotes such as 'it is through me and the Father.' Jesus was probably a more quite mysterious person. I wouldn't compare Jesus to Paul or mixed their words up in any way.

reply to post by greyer

Jesus was probably a more quite mysterious person.

Right.
Jesus said, "what I speak in private you will have to shout from the rooftops".
While he was alive he was avoiding being proclaimed king because he knew that role he would fill in heaven.

This may have been said, but not reading the whole thread.

To the OP, you haven't read the whole new Testament. Jesus said He came to preach to the Jews, and because they were so hard headed, He spoke to them in parables. He didn't tell them everything because they would not have accepted it. Consider all the miracles that Jesus did for them though. Paul did not do that to the same degree.

Paul was sent to the gentiles, and they were hungry for the truth. The gentiles were not under the Law, though they were still slaves to it. They didn't have the same frame of reference though that the Jews had. The message of love Paul brought to them was not inconsistent with Jesus's message. There was no greater love shown to mankind than that which Jesus spoke without words on the Cross.

I would also say, if you read Jesus's words, that He knew He was dealing with demons. He regularly called out His adversaries as children of Satan. His message was much sterner to them.

But for final comparison, consider the message Jesus gave to the Samaritan woman at the well, an enemy of the Jews, knowing that she lived in sin, yet only had compassion for her. How is that in the least bit inconsistent with Paul's message?

Read for understanding, and you'll find much less inconsistency in the Bible. Behind all the harsh words and seemingly inconsistent behavior is a message of love for mankind that is incredibly consistent, even back to Genesis.

reply to post by 3NL1GHT3N3D1


I just mean,how do we know it's incomplete? How do we know we have the whole thing? We were pretty sure of that until the Dead Sea Scrolls were found, and they are still widely ignored. Who's to say even more writings haven't been lost or kept from us. I think most people here would accept that as a possibility at the least. What about the huge chunk of his life we don't have info on, since we don't have writings about it, does it not exist then? I guess I just fail to see the logic in the OP title.

reply to post by KAOStheory


The Dead Sea Scrolls only contained OT books, not NT ones.

My point with this thread was: why was Paul needed at all? If Jesus came to spread the good news, why did he need someone else to finish the message for him and to bring entirely new concepts and doctrines into the fold?

The Gospel of Mark was based on what Peter recounted from his travels with Jesus, yet the doctrine Paul taught is nowhere to be found in the gospel(s). Peter was present when Jesus told his apostles he told them everything his Father taught him in John 15:15, so why is Paul's doctrine in none of the gospels?

If Jesus only told them what his Father had taught him up to that point and didn't know Paul's doctrine yet, he could not have been god, because god knows everything infinitely before it happens.

Originally posted by KAOStheory
reply to post by 3NL1GHT3N3D1

 

I just mean,how do we know it's incomplete? How do we know we have the whole thing? We were pretty sure of that until the Dead Sea Scrolls were found, and they are still widely ignored. Who's to say even more writings haven't been lost or kept from us. I think most people here would accept that as a possibility at the least. What about the huge chunk of his life we don't have info on, since we don't have writings about it, does it not exist then? I guess I just fail to see the logic in the OP title.

Be careful with gnostic teachings found in the dead see scrolls. The gnostics believed in "revealed" knowledge. To me, they were little more than fan fiction writers, attempting to fill in holes they thought they saw by making things up. Many of the gnostic gospels make little sense, such as the gospel of Judas. When did he supposedly write this thing? He was dead a few hours after selling Christ out, but supposedly Christ worked it all out with him? So he sold Jesus out, sat down and wrote this gospel, then hanged himself, but didn't bother to mention that he was going to kill himself. It doesn't make sense.

Much of gnostic works make sense if you deny Christ's divinity, then you are bound to wallow in the confusion they bring. If you accept Jesus as the Son of God, then you realize that He saw us much different than we can imagine. The gospel of Mary... how could Christ have ever loved one woman above all mankind? It doesn't make sense. Jesus would see all men and women as the spirits they... we... truly are. His love for all of us is complete. He can't have greater love for one woman, or one man, unless you deny His divinity. I will not, so gnostic teachings are inconsistent with the message brought to us in the Bible. The 4 gospels correlate with each other enough to indicate their truth.

reply to post by MRSeeker


Did you know 2 Peter is pseudographical? That means someone else other than Peter wrote it then attributed to him. Plus, there is such thing as disinformation, and Christianity/Gnosticism is not an exception from this. In fact, I'd call the entire bible a work of disinformation.

reply to post by MRSeeker


Which texts from the dead sea scrolls were gnostic?

reply to post by 3NL1GHT3N3D1

The Dead Sea Scrolls only contained OT books, not NT ones.

A lot of the DDS material was written when the events described in the NT would have happened, so they are very important in figuring out what the NT was talking about.

Originally posted by 3NL1GHT3N3D1
Jesus came to preach his gospel, yet died before he could say everything he needed to say.

We all go before our time. We all die with unfinished business.

Jesus was no different.

reply to post by 3NL1GHT3N3D1


Just because Jesus taught all that he knew does not mean the listeners adhered to the teachings for every second.

This is evidenced through Jesus's many tests to his disciples.

Also, Paul preaching is the embodiment of Christ's purpose. Love. Love thy neighbor. Love thy enemy.

How strong of a message is Christ's when Saul, a man that persecuted and killed Christians, turns around, becomes Paul, and becomes a leading figure in the movement.

It wasn't incomplete, Paul was strengthening the faith to the point where he had to exhort the apostles when some did not want to break bread with the Gentiles, which is a very symbolic gesture.

Saul/Paul wasn't perfect like Christ. A lot of people would look at Christ and say, I am not perfect like Christ and I cannot measure up to be like him, so why try? Paul set another example for the other servants to try and emulate as Saul was very relatable to the people during the time.