Is Jesus objective or subjective?

[Adjac]

God is objective, but because Jesus is human like us wouldn't his experience be subjective too? would he then be subjective truth?

 

[childeye 2]

God is objective, but because Jesus is human like us wouldn't his experience be subjective too? would he then be subjective truth?

People or persons are not objective or subjective. The terms objective and subjective refer to views or perspectives of what is True. There is no such thing as subjective Truth, there are subjective views or limited perspectives of what is true. For example an opinion is subjective, but it's not a fact.

 

[Adjac]

People or persons are not objective or subjective. The terms objective and subjective refer to views or perspectives of what is True. There is no such thing as subjective Truth, there are subjective views or limited perspectives of what is true. For example an opinion is subjective, but it's not a fact.

okay, then how would Jesus be identified? what he thinks would be subjective to his own experience?

 

[timewerx]

Subjective thinking is a hindrance to higher spirituality.

There's hard proof of its detrimental effect to one's mind and any supernatural abilities they may possess.

Most people don't care because they don't know what they're missing or don't care to investigate, as long as they have their gadgets, netflix, comfy cars, parties, hobbies, and other shallow worldly things.

Of course, you don't know what you're missing in the first place if you never knew you had it. And that's what subjective thinking does.

It's how the enemy wants you to think so you remain insignificant, totally useless against his plans.

It's really just a very few people around the world who's actually fighting the devil. The rest, the vast majority are actually blindly helping him instead, including many Christians.

 

[timewerx]

okay, then how would Jesus be identified? what he thinks would be subjective to his own experience?

Some of Christ's teachings have a cultural context to it (fairly subjective) and some do not (purely objective).

It's considered a heresy to figure out what they are. So it's up to you to find out which ones are subjective against the teachings that are purely objective.

Once you do. Watch the supernatural gifts get unleashed.

The majority of Christianity is spiritually dead. Because they have put their mind in a little box and locked it up and would fight anyone who tries to help them out of it.

The Bible says only few will find the way to life.... Today, it's a considered HERESY to believe that is true!

 

[Daniel9v9]

No, Christ IS the truth. He is an objective - that is, real - man in whom the fullness of God dwells.

John puts it well in 1 John 1:1 and John 1:1 where he says he witnessed the physical, tangible reality of God in flesh, whom they have seen, heard and touched. Christ, His person and what He says, is not some abstract idea or some subjective notion, but the one true God - YHWH - in flesh.

 

[thecolorsblend]

Some of Christ's teachings have a cultural context to it (fairly subjective) and some do not (purely objective).

It's considered a heresy to figure out what they are. So it's up to you to find out which ones are subjective against the teachings that are purely objective.

Once you do. Watch the supernatural gifts get unleashed.

The majority of Christianity is spiritually dead. Because they have put their mind in a little box and locked it up and would fight anyone who tries to help them out of it.

The Bible says only few will find the way to life.... Today, it's a considered HERESY to believe that is true!

2.18 billion people in the world self-identify as Christian. There are 7.53 billion people worldwide.

Hypothetically, even if all 2.18 billion self-identified Christians in the world today go to Heaven, it would still be "few" who received eternal life. Our Lord's words are true just as a matter of plain numbers.

Which, I suppose, means He made a fairly objective statement with that.

 

[thecolorsblend]

God is objective

What do you mean by that exactly?

but because Jesus is human like us wouldn't his experience be subjective too? would he then be subjective truth?

We are created in God's image. We all have a perspective unique to ourselves. I find it illogical to suggest that Our Lord didn't have an experience and perspective relative to Himself which nobody else can quite share.

 

[timewerx]

2.18 billion people in the world self-identify as Christian. There are 7.53 billion people worldwide.

Hypothetically, even if all 2.18 billion self-identified Christians in the world today go to Heaven, it would still be "few" who received eternal life. Our Lord's words are true just as a matter of plain numbers.

Which, I suppose, means He made a fairly objective statement with that.

Not sure if that is a sarcasm.

Strong's Concordance of the word used for "Few" seems to strongly implicate a small or little number.

A small number... EEK!

 

[SkyWriting]

For example an opinion is subjective, but it's not a fact.

There is no reason for it not to be a fact. It might be, it might not.
You might have an opinion on the color of a car. And you might be right.

 

[thecolorsblend]

Not sure if that is a sarcasm.

Yeah, I get that a lot. But no, it was sincere.

 

[childeye 2]

There is no reason for it not to be a fact. It might be, it might not.
You might have an opinion on the color of a car. And you might be right.

There are three sentences that you state above in reference to an opinion. There is one which I have emboldened: "There is no reason for it not to be a fact." Respectfully this statement is false.

There are two sentences which I have put in Italics: "It might be, it might not. You might have an opinion on the color of a car. And you might be right." These statements are correct and show why the first statement is false since they give a reason for the opinion to not be a fact. They convey that in my opinion on the color of a car I might be right, hence I might be wrong. There is a reason why a fact and an opinion are two different things with two different definitions.

 

[SkyWriting]

There are three sentences that you state above in reference to an opinion. There is one which I have emboldened: "There is no reason for it not to be a fact." Respectfully this statement is false.

Sure. Why is that?
My car is red.
How is that not a fact?
How is it a fact?
How is it not my opinion?

 

[SkyWriting]

Subjective thinking is a hindrance to higher spirituality.

If that is a fact, then what is your source?
Because, I think you just pulled that from your hat.

 

[childeye 2]

okay, then how would Jesus be identified?

Jesus is the Name of a person who is called the Christ. The meaning of the term Christ is The True Image of God sent by God. This designation is meant to denote the True content of God's Character according to God's revelation, or the means by which God chose to reveal Himself. As opposed to any image of God imagined by Angels or Mankind or any created intellect.

what he thinks would be subjective to his own experience?

I'm not sure I understand this question. Surely as the Personification of God, the man Jesus has his own unique perspective, but this does not mean he lacked objectivity. On the contrary, being without sin he would be the most reasonable and trustworthy person, full of grace, mercy, and understanding.

 

[childeye 2]

Sure. Why is that?

I explained that using your own statement "It might be, it might not."

My car is red.
How is that not a fact?

If your car is red as you claim, then it is a fact.

How is it a fact?

Because red is red.

How is it not my opinion?

Because it didn't turn red simply because you claimed it was red.

 

[SkyWriting]

Because it didn't turn red simply because you claimed it was red.

I can claim it is red.
That might be a fact.
It might be my opinion.
It's only a fact during the time frame that your opinion matches mine.
As soon as your opinion doesn't agree, then it's back to being an opinion of mine alone.
While we agree, I was right. When you start to disagree...it suddenly changes to wrong.
John 18:38
Pilate said to (Jesus) “What is truth?”

 

[childeye 2]

I can claim it is red.
That might be a fact.
It might be my opinion.

Are you conveying that it's your opinion that it's a fact, or that it's a fact that it's your opinion, or is it your opinion that it's your opinion, or is it your opinion it's a fact that it's your opinion, etc... ? Words have definitions for the sake of clarity not obfuscation.

It's only a fact during the time frame that your opinion matches mine.
As soon as your opinion doesn't agree, then it's back to being an opinion of mine alone.
While we agree, I was right. When you start to disagree...it suddenly changes to wrong.

I imagine that when people got together to agree on what to call the color that we call red, they all eventually had to come to some understanding on what they would call it so that they could communicate more efficiently. Would you agree?

If it's a fact that the color of a car is red, it doesn't change color to yellow no matter how many people agree that it's yellow. Would you agree?

John 18:38
Pilate said to (Jesus) “What is truth?”

What is the difference between knowledge and ignorance? This is not a rhetorical question. I would like to know if you know the difference between the meanings of the two terms and how and why they are opposites.

 

[SkyWriting]

If it's a fact that the color of a car is red, it doesn't change color to yellow no matter how many people agree that it's yellow. Would you agree?

Having a certain amount of color blindness, I am an expert on this.
The only 'fact' is among people who agree. If they all change their opinion,
then the facts have changed.

This account of "facts" is the same in court and in science.
You claiming there are facts independent of what people believe
but not supporting your claim.

 

[childeye 2]

Having a certain amount of color blindness, I am an expert on this.

One of my son in laws can't see certain colors, or rather he says some colors differently. If I remember correctly, red looks somewhat like purple to him. I imagine that with such a disability you must take people's word for it that colors you don't see do indeed exist.​

The only 'fact' is among people who agree. If they all change their opinion,
then the facts have changed.

I'm a student of linguistics. All of my life I have studied semantics, psycho-semantics, psychological manipulation, propaganda, sophistry. Respectfully, you are misunderstanding the meaning of the term "fact" and misappropriating it in your reasoning.

This account of "facts" is the same in court and in science.

If you're referring to your account of what the term "facts" means, no it isn't allowed in court and it is not scientific. No one can prove for a fact that a car changes color when they change their opinion of what color it is.

You claiming there are facts independent of what people believe
but not supporting your claim.

Not exactly. Properly articulated I'm claiming that Truth is authoritative and not subjective.

I proved my claim by pointing out that the car doesn't change color when someone changes their opinion about what the color is. The distinction drawn between a fact and the Truth is that a fact is that which is provable through observation while the Truth exists even if not observed and an opinion is an assumption about the Truth.​