Why did Jesus Leave?

[Chriliman]

No, that's called confidence...

I think faith in something can lead to confidence in that same thing, if that thing is consistently true.

 

[tatteredsoul]

I think faith in something can lead to confidence in that same thing, if that thing is consistently true.

You would think...

 

[HitchSlap]

I think faith in something can lead to confidence in that same thing, if that thing is consistently true.

And when it's consistently wrong?

I'll ask again, how would you know if you were wrong?

 

[devolved]

And when it's consistently wrong?

I'll ask again, how would you know if you were wrong?

I'd say what if you can't tell whether it's true or false, or the claim structured in such a way that imaginary causes have to be ascribed to real events?

 

[Deidre32]

And when it's consistently wrong?

I'll ask again, how would you know if you were wrong?

How would you know if you are?

 

[Deidre32]

I think faith in something can lead to confidence in that same thing, if that thing is consistently true.

I love this, well said.

 

[Ana the Ist]

Since you ask, I think that his purpose was to redeem mankind and triumph over death--and, of course, to make that known. For him to have lived forever on Earth would IMHO diminish those messages or accomplishments.

Why would it "diminish" those "messages/accomplishments"?

You have to admit, if he stuck around, then his religion would have no comparison to any other religion based upon mythical figures/personalities.

 

[devolved]

How would you know if you are?

That's a good question to ask.

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

That's a good question to ask.

Didn't the disciples following Jesus in the NT ask Him something similar to this ? (or did Jesus simply tell them how they would know the Truth ?)
Also, how did the disciples KNOW Jesus always told the Truth, and is the Messiah ?

 

[Archaeopteryx]

Because if you know everything, you don't have to trust in anything else beyond your own knowledge. Get it?

Belief becomes knowledge. Everything becomes knowledge. You don't need to trust the measure of anything because you know the measure. How is this not obvious?

Omniscient means you know absolutely everything, absolutely. Why would you need faith when you know everything. (I can see why this would be confusing if you don't understand what faith is in the first place.)

If you don't know everything, then some measure of your combined intellectual movement is based on faith. Faith and knowledge are two sides of the same coin.

This is rather silly, IMO. Essentially, you are saying that we need to know everything in order to know anything. Since we are not omniscient, and therefore don't know everything, we cannot know anything, on your view. Moreover, everything we believe becomes an exercise in faith, no matter how well supported those beliefs are. On this view, homeopathy would stand on equal ground epistemically with medicines that have been tested in rigorous clinical trials.

I also think that you have it backwards, in that faith often involves assertions made with absolute certainty, even if such certainty is clearly not warranted by the evidence.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

Do you understand that if you don't have omniscience, you don't know everything - and therefore you have put trust (read: faith) in something beyond your own self (trends, statistics, rarity, etc.) to substantiate the likelihood, and therefore confidence in an event happening?

Since when was absolute certainty a prerequisite for knowledge?

 

[Archaeopteryx]

Oh, you want to get into math?

Firstly we are in Euclidean space, right? Base 10? Check? Check. Ok, 2+2 = 4.

But wait, we are assuming 2 is something, right? Are we going with the axiom that 2 is a concrete, well-rounded integer (is it an integer?) Are we going to assume that the number "4" is also well-rounded? Is 4 unique?

For math, axioms, postulates and consequential corollaries are used to clean up the mess of uncertainties and things we assume to be true. Usually, you need the right dimension, field, ring, space, and a slew of acceptable axioms and postulates to back you up. 2+2 is not as easy as you may think it is, but because it is mostly assumed to be in a certain space, with certain properties we assume that its addition yields a certain image - in this case it is 4. So, yes you need faith in your establish coordinate system, field, ring, and numbers in order to say 2+2=4. Go to Vega, and see if that is the same.

In other words, you have faith in the mathematics you have learned - that has worked for you so far (trends) - to the point where you trust that 2+2=4. So you can extrapolate your faith in that system to say that 2+2+2 = 6, for example. On earth, at least.

Call it whatever you want.

I called it deduction.

 

[Archaeopteryx]

I don't think that was the intent of his question. You seemed to imply that we need to have faith that computer doesn't implode. His question was in regards to that assertion. You seemed to imply that either we need to know with a 100% certainty, otherwise it's all faith.

He and I merely point out that it's not the case. Again, you seem to fudge the semantics to level the playing field which isn't leveled. There's a vast difference between trusting that LCD will not explode and believing in a story that someone resurrected and is coming back on a white horse to do the same to everyone who believes.

He seems desperate to conflate uncertainty with faith so as to say that any measure of uncertainty around a particular belief makes faith necessary.

 

[Gregory Thompson]

I think it's a valid question from a position of any given skeptic.

I really don't buy the oversimplified answers like "If he didn't leave then Holy Spirit wouldn't come", Or "He left because the mission to spread the Gospel had to be fulfilled", or to "Prepare a place", again neither make a lot of sense in a scope what Christianity is and what it expects.

The question is whether this world is better if Jesus is there for all to be able to experience apart from some "feeling" or a book narrative? It wouldn't make Christianity to be so doubtable. Every Thomas out there could visit a 2000 year old dude with holes in his hands and believe.

Why leave without a trace, and except leave the world with a story and a promise of hope.

It seems like a good excuse to mask the reason as to why Jesus is not here. "Well, he was here, but you've missed him by about 2000 years, BUT he's coming back soon... so just wait and read this book about him".

Perhaps there are other reasonable explanations, but what would these be? What do you think?

There are many dead men over the centuries who have died without a trace, a good question is ... why are people still talking about this one?
.
Because of my life experience, the holy spirit reason tends to work for me, i also understand why the holy spirit reason doesn't for most people. The holy spirit has become a forgotten God these days, replaced by the bible.
.
So I suppose from one angle, leaving hope for humanity to inspire change would seem a good place to start.
.
Another approach is to test everything taught and say ... how does this connect to reality, give it a go, keep the stuff that applies, and live in questions about the stuff that doesn't seem to happen when I try it.
.
Another approach is .... what if the judgment already happened like .. you know .. back then ... and this is a dream we're having in the outer darkness ... and in reality .. none of this is real. We're just assuming this is the same creation that is talked about in Genesis, but what if it isn't? Philosophy is fun that way.

 

[tatteredsoul]

This is rather silly, IMO. Essentially, you are saying that we need to know everything in order to know anything. Since we are not omniscient, and therefore don't know everything, we cannot know anything, on your view. Moreover, everything we believe becomes an exercise in faith, no matter how well supported those beliefs are. On this view, homeopathy would stand on equal ground epistemically with medicines that have been tested in rigorous clinical trials.

I also think that you have it backwards, in that faith often involves assertions made with absolute certainty, even if such certainty is clearly not warranted by the evidence.

Oh, ok.

 

[tatteredsoul]

He seems desperate to conflate uncertainty with faith so as to say that any measure of uncertainty around a particular belief makes faith necessary.

I am.

 

[tatteredsoul]

Since when was absolute certainty a prerequisite for knowledge?

I guess since never?

 

[devolved]

Because of my life experience, the holy spirit reason tends to work for me, i also understand why the holy spirit reason doesn't for most people. The holy spirit has become a forgotten God these days, replaced by the bible.

Michael, can you help me out and let me know what exactly does that mean in terms of our human experience?

Can you give me a real life example where holy spirit worked to help you through a decision... I just want to understand what exactly you are talking about.

 

[Born Again2004]

Hi Seeker, or should I say Doubter? I have seen some pretty good replies but it appears that you are here to doubt and not accept any of them as plausible. Here is how I would reply; all based on scripture and which I will give you, if you want:

• In your present lacking condition, it is impossible for you to understand any of this. It is totally understandable and all of us who believe where once exactly like you, full of doubt and questions. For me, I look back, and actually, I didn't really have either...I just didn't think about it either way or care. At least, you question....you are here for a reason and that is the first big step towards understanding!
• Simply put, Jesus had to leave to fulfill scripture. As a believer, fulfilling the word of God (Bible) is everything....the Bible for tells the future and it later comes true, this is called prophecy...this is a basis for truth! Unlike all the Priests (intermediary between man and God) before him, when Jesus was done, he sat down at the right hand of God, signifying that his work was finished, complete. All other Priest before him, could never sit down, they had to repeat what hey did year after year!
• Spiritually, he is the Holy Spirit; and he transcends all of our knowledge . He is Omnipresent, he is the Alpha and the Omega...He is here with us now and, at the same time, seated in heaven and we are with him now!

 

[Albion]

Why would it "diminish" those "messages/accomplishments"?

You have to admit, if he stuck around, then his religion would have no comparison to any other religion based upon mythical figures/personalities.

Ana, I just have to disagree with that perspective. We're all simply playing a guessing game, of course.

Still, I believe that events make an impact in part because of context, timing, and so on. The events surrounding the Resurrection are eye-opening and climatic. That's the payoff of Jesus' whole life on Earth and certainly of his public ministry.

And remember that, after the Resurrection, he wasn't just a normal man except that you'd never know that he'd been laid in the grave for a few days. He had been transformed such that his closest disciples didn't recognize him, although he looked like a typical man otherwise.

The notion that he would then go on to preach in Cyprus or Arabia, conduct classes on the meaning of his accomplishment like some guru, or open an office and hire secretaries or whatever else was in our friend's mind...and that any of this would strengthen the appeal is just unrealistic IMO. It would be anti-climatic, in fact.