Did they know him as the Christ?

[Benjamin McGuire]

25 minutes ago, Bassil said:

The woman, with no doubt, was talking about the Messiah. But Jesus didn't. You can't prove otherwise without a clear statement from Jesus that he is the Messiah. You can insist as much as you want, but that won't make you right.

You are just spitting out nonsense now.

The text not only tells us that Jesus claimed to be the Messiah, the text also explains to us how we should respond to the claim in the text - that we should approach Jesus and listen to His words, and observe His actions, and in that way come to the same conclusion as the people that the woman spoke to - that Jesus is the Messiah. This is the meaning of the text.

You on the other hand are left asserting (contrary to the text) that this is wrong. And then you question the validity of the text itself -

25 minutes ago, Bassil said:

no one witnessed the conversation between Jesus and the woman!

And this is also wrong. Certainly, for there to be a conversation there had to be a witness - both Jesus and the woman who conversed could speak to the content of that discussion. And the woman, the text suggests, described her conversation to the people of her village, so that they too were interested in knowing of she was right, and went and approached Jesus. And the text never tells us that the conversation wasn't shared with others - who become sufficient witnesses of the original conversation (even if they experience it second hand). And this isn't really important because of what happens afterwords. Those who were told by the woman what had happened - they didn't have to rely on her testimony - they were able to go and talk to Jesus themselves - to have their own conversation. John tells us (verses 40-42, NASB):

Quote

So when the Samaritans came to Jesus, they were asking Him to stay with them; and He stayed there two days. Many more believed because of His word; and they were saying to the woman, “It is no longer because of what you said that we believe, for we have heard for ourselves and know that this One truly is the Savior of the world.”

So all of these other conversations have the same result - more people believe that Jesus is the Messiah - the "Savior of the world".

In the long run, I suspect it really doesn't matter. Your mind is already made up ... any argument will work for you in that situation.

Edited September 26, 2023 by Benjamin McGuire

[manol]

@Bassil, what do the terms "Messiah" and "Christ" mean or imply to you?

I'm not under the impression that you object to the idea that Jesus is the "Savior of the World" (whether or not in the same sense that Christian typically interprets that phrase); rather, I get the impression that there is something objectionable to you about the terms "Messiah" and "Christ". 

[Bassil]

31 minutes ago, Benjamin McGuire said:

The text not only tells us that Jesus claimed to be the Messiah

I know you'll insist on it. I'll make it simple for you.

If Jesus was in court and he was accused of claiming to be the Messiah, he could easily deny it. He could easily say that by saying 'I am he,' he meant he is the one he will declare all things, and he never meant that he's the Messiah. The court then wouldn't be able to convict him. The only way to convict him is if he said clearly that he is the Messiah.

[The Nehor]

Just now, Bassil said:

I know you'll insist on it. I'll make it simple for you.

If Jesus was in court and he was accused of claiming to be the Messiah, he could easily deny it. He could easily say that by saying 'I am he,' he meant he is the one he will declare all things, and he never meant that he's the Messiah. The court then wouldn't be able to convict him. The only way to convict him is if he said clearly that he is the Messiah.

You’re insisting that an English translation commissioned by a king who was convinced there was an international satanic conspiracy of witches out to get him somehow proves this when the Greek it was translated from does not?

[Benjamin McGuire]

2 minutes ago, Bassil said:

I know you'll insist on it. I'll make it simple for you.

If Jesus was in court and he was accused of claiming to be the Messiah, he could easily deny it. He could easily say that by saying 'I am he,' he meant he is the one he will declare all things, and he never meant that he's the Messiah. The court then wouldn't be able to convict him. The only way to convict him is if he said clearly that he is the Messiah.

This isn't making it simple. It is denying the plain meaning of the text. You should try addressing what I have written instead of simply repeating yourself.

[Bassil]

47 minutes ago, Benjamin McGuire said:

both Jesus and the woman who conversed could speak to the content of that discussion. And the woman, the text suggests, described her conversation to the people of her village, so that they too were interested in knowing of she was right, and went and approached Jesus.

All those are assumptions.

"

... Jesus said to her, "Give Me
a drink."
For His disciples had gone away into
the city to buy food.

" (John, 4:7,8) this one is not an assumption. It's a fact.

[Benjamin McGuire]

Just now, Bassil said:

All those are assumptions.

I have been quoting the text - in context - as an entire narrative. You keep taking parts out and insisting that those bits means something that is completely unsupportable from the context.

[Bassil]

25 minutes ago, manol said:

I'm not under the impression that you object to the idea that Jesus is the "Savior of the World"

That's true. He already saved us.

[Bassil]

27 minutes ago, manol said:

what do the terms "Messiah" and "Christ" mean or imply to you?

Christ = Messiah: the anointed, the awaited king. The problem is that the 'Messiah' is part of the Old Testament, and I don't believe in OT. It's simple like that. 

[manol]

1 hour ago, Bassil said:

That [Jesus is the Savior of the World]'s true. He already saved us.

Imo this is the heart of the matter, and I agree with you.

1 hour ago, Bassil said:

Christ = Messiah: the anointed, the awaited king. The problem is that the 'Messiah' is part of the Old Testament, and I don't believe in OT. It's simple like that. 

My understanding is that the way the LDS Church uses the term “Christ”, its primary meaning is “the Son of God and Savior of the World.”  In fact I would say they use the terms "Christ" and "Savior" as if they are essentially synonyms.

In my opinion you don't need anything found in the Old Testament to fully appreciate and partake of Jesus as the Son of God and Savior of the World. 

And in my opinion if the term "Christ" has negative connotations for you because of its association with the term "Messiah" and thence with the Old Testament, then don't use it!  Use the terminology that works for YOU!  If what works for you is "Jesus the Son of God", or "Jesus the Savior of the World", how can that be wrong??

[Bassil]

12 minutes ago, manol said:

n my opinion you don't need anything found in the Old Testament to fully appreciate and partake of Jesus as the Son of God and Savior of the World. 

Exactly, that is my point. I separate Jesus from OT and I reject any connection between them. I believe OT is a dangerous book and a threat against humanity. That is why I refuse any link between our savior, Jesus, and such a heinous book. I'm defending Jesus.

[Bassil]

18 minutes ago, manol said:

Use the terminology that works for YOU!  If what works for you is "Jesus the Son of God", or "Jesus the Savior of the World", how can that be wrong??

Not everyone is like you. Many think that God or the Son of God isn't enough.

[Bassil]

22 minutes ago, manol said:

My understanding is that the way the LDS Church uses the term “Christ”, its primary meaning is “the Son of God and Savior of the World.”

I really hope I find my place in such a church.

[Pyreaux]

I just don't exactly blame the prophets for textual corruption as much as the Keepers of their words who've corrupted it. Those keepers who I think portray God as cruel, they also killed the prophets, and deny and delete messianic prooftexts and refute Jesus is the Christ. I'm inclined to believe he is the Christ, as that's what the textual villains are trying to hide. Its hard for me to think the early Christians were also corrupting the New Testament about the matter of Christ... You know what, I think we could use a modern prophet to clear this up.

Edited September 27, 2023 by Pyreaux

[Bassil]

2 hours ago, Pyreaux said:

I just don't exactly blame the prophets for textual corruption as much as the Keepers of their words who've corrupted it. Those keepers who portray God as a cruel, also killed the prophets, who deny and delete messianic prooftexts and refute Jesus is the Christ. I'm inclined to be believe he is, as that's what the villains are trying to hide. Its hard for me to think the early Christians were also corrupting the New Testament about the Christ too... You know what, I think we could use a modern prophet to clear this up.

You have the right to have your faith.

[mfbukowski]

29 minutes ago, Bassil said:

You have the right to have your faith.

This is precisely what we all need to learn in my opinion.

Let's say we all want to meet at point X somewhere on this planet, and we all turn on our GPS for directions to get there.

Every set of directions will be different, but theoretically if we follow them, we will all end up at the same place 

[manol]

On 9/26/2023 at 8:35 PM, Bassil said:

I really hope I find my place in such a church.

I don't know of a church that combines your purity of belief in Jesus with ignoring (or outright rejecting) the Old Testament.   It seems to me that churches that believe in Jesus also believe in a continuity of scripture which includes the Old Testament and the New Testament, rather than focusing exclusively on the words of Jesus.

About three decades ago I came across a book that might be of interest to you.  I own or have owned four different versions, and from the link below you will be able to download a .pdf copy of the version that I consider to be the best.  The name of this book is, "A Course in Miracles". 

The term "Christ" is used throughout the book, but never in the sense of "the awaited king from the Old Testament", as far as I can recall.  If you come across Christian terminology that is outside of your comfort zone, I encourage you to still give the book a chance, because it's probably not using such terms the way you are used to seeing them used. 

You can find a fair amount of opinion and commentary online about A Course in Miracles, but I recommend just reading the first section of the first chapter ("Principles of Miracles") and forming your own opinion, without anyone else's interpretation. The text itself begins on page 38 of the .pdf document (the table of contents is pretty long):

[PDF] [EPUB] A Course in Miracles: Original Edition Download (oceanofpdf.com)

I can try to answer questions if you have any.

And if this book doesn't ring true for you, then obviously it's NOT "for you".   But if it does, imo reading it can be kind of like sitting in on a lecture taught by Jesus, even if there is no church involved.  

 

Edited September 28, 2023 by manol

[Bassil]

10 hours ago, manol said:

I can try to answer questions if you have any.

Thank you for the book. I downloaded both formats.

[mfbukowski]

On 9/26/2023 at 6:35 PM, Bassil said:

I really hope I find my place in such a church.

Then you need to be aware of more scriptures we have: Book of Mormon, Doctrine and Covenants, Pearl of Great Price.

All are regarded as "equal" to the Bible, if not superior for us; in fact Joseph Smith re-wrote many passages as he was inspired.

I have not heard you mention those books at all.

[Calm]

1 hour ago, mfbukowski said:

Then you need to be aware of more scriptures we have: Book of Mormon, Doctrine and Covenants, Pearl of Great Price.

All are regarded as "equal" to the Bible, if not superior for us; in fact Joseph Smith re-wrote many passages as he was inspired.

I have not heard you mention those books at all.

And we accept the Old Testament and all of the New Testament as scripture, even if not infallible, as well as the prophets of the OT as actual prophets.  

This link has all of our scriptures.

https://www.churchofjesuschrist.org/study/scriptures?lang=eng&platform=web

Edited September 28, 2023 by Calm

[Bassil]

15 hours ago, mfbukowski said:

I have not heard you mention those books at all.

Because I haven't read a single line of any of these books yet. I have the Book of Mormon, and I intend to start reading it. 

[Bassil]

14 hours ago, Calm said:

This link has all of our scriptures.

Thanks for the link.