JESUS - MAN OR GOD?

Love Jesus, not Fear him!

Saturday, January 28, 2017

Saturday, January 28, 2017
JESUS - MAN OR GOD?
1/28/2017

Hello, Everyone!

Tomorrow, the local Laramie Boomerang will be featuring the 2nd of a "trilogy" of 3 articles I am writing about Jesus. I will copy that article below - and those of you who wish to "entertain" yourselves with my thoughts can do so. The rest of you can use that wonderful escape X on the top right of your screen. OK?

Thanks!

Hey, Everyone, Have a Great Day! Be in touch as you wish!

Doing what everyone should do - think for myself! Good Luck to all of us who believe in doing that!

Gently,

Francis William Bessler
Laramie, Wyoming
www.una-bella-vita.com



JESUS -

MAN OR GOD?

By

Francis William Bessler

Laramie, Wyoming

1/22/2017



I do believe that no one has ever loved the one we call "Jesus" more than I do. I am not claiming I love him more than anyone else. I am only claiming my love of the man, Jesus, is as great as that of anyone; but notice that I reference Jesus by the title of "man" - not God. The reason I do that is because in my view of life, it makes no sense to think that any of us may have originated in some fashion that is different than all of us - nor should any one of us be defined in nature as different than any other of us.

The only reason that I can see that we would need some "extraordinary" person to "override" the ordinary is that we are not satisfied with the ordinary. When I look at life, I am amazed at its wonder; and being amazed, I see no reason why I should not be satisfied with it - as is. In fact, virtue, for me, is simply embracing the wonderful Gift of Life - not denouncing it and needing some "extraordinary" measure to make it better.

Be that as it may, in my previous article, SON OF GOD, I argued that we humans have had God wrong since the beginning of time; and part of the reason for that has been that we have had a mistaken notion of woman. That's right - a mistaken notion of woman. It is due to that mistaken notion held by the ancients that God was ever perceived - let alone declared - as male.

Let me explain. The ancients of mankind, in general, were probably unaware that women have ovaries. Thus, they probably concluded that man was the sole source of life, in a way. Man deposited his seed into a woman - and woman proceeded to nourish that seed which blossomed into the life of a little one.

The problem with that is that it was an illusion. It was not true that the male was the sole source of life and that woman only nourishes what man begins. Surprise, surprise! Woman is not only needed for her womb, but for another seed that blends with that of the man to "make life."

But what did man probably do with his illusion of himself? If man is the sole source of life in terms of human life, then if God creates all things, God must then be male. God did not need a female counterpart anymore than a human male does - or ancient man probably concluded. From that, God was made man because man decided it had to be that way. If man "creates" human life by his own seed, then God must be male to do the same. And that I Believe is the reason we have declared God as male.

What does that have to do with Jesus being man or the son of God? It has everything to do with it. Because ancient doctors of the church probably concluded that God is male for the illusion thereof and that the male does not need a female seed to produce life, then all it took to make Jesus the son of God was to have a male, God, have relations with a human female, Mary, and presto - out came The Son of God.

In our ignorance of the female ovary, we probably overlooked the fact that Mary had to cooperate with any male counterpart in conceiving life - in this case, the life of one we call Jesus; but in the mind of ancient man, Mary had nothing to do with it - except that she "allowed" herself to be the recipient of a Masculine Divine Seed that became on its own, Jesus.

Well, I Believe that is how we concluded that God could bear a human son in the first place. God was simply a guy that deposited his God seed into Mary - and presto, Baby Jesus, born not of Mary who must have also provided her seed, but of God - and God alone.

What do you do with that notion when you realize that God is probably not male in the first place - and that it was our mistaken notion of God that led us to conclude otherwise? If God is truly Infinite Sacred Existence, as I Believe, then God would not be a personal source of anything, but rather a general source of every thing.

But ancient Christianity probably did not know of the ovary; and so it probably falsely concluded that woman was not at all needed for life - except to provide a vessel for his seed; and woman was made to be less than man for that reason.

And my friend, Jesus, probably became a "victim" of all of that ignorance. In suspecting that God was a man and that God is an Individual that can be separate from man, the ancients probably decided that man had to have fallen away from God in order to use God as a Commander to demand obedience to an Authoritative Male God for man to get back to God. Jesus was only the "personification" of a male God - thus demanding through him, obedience to be restored to God.

But God is not an Individual in the first place that is outside of man - to which an estranged man must be restored - but rather a Divine Presence that is inside of man; and Jesus is not the product of a single male, God, without his mother being a provider of her seed as well. That I Believe!

Who was the real father of Jesus? Because our source of that tale, stories that ended in the BIBLE, decided to make God the actual father, we will never know. Was it Joseph? Maybe! But does it really matter? In a future article, I will continue my own search of the one we call "Jesus."

Thanks! Francis William Bessler



To Be Continued!