Miracles, and the character of Jesus

[Alexander]

This is one of my favorite passages from the Bible. I find it is one of the most unique passages of the whole Bible.

(Mk 5:25-34)

A woman was there who had been subject to bleeding for twelve years. She had suffered a great deal under the care of many doctors and had spent all she had, yet instead of getting better she grew worse.

When she heard about Jesus, she came up behind him in the crowd and touched his cloak, because she thought, "If I just touch his clothes, I will be healed."

Immediately her bleeding stopped and she felt in her body that she was freed from her suffering.

At once Jesus realized that power had gone out from him. He turned around in the crowd and asked, "Who touched my clothes?"

"You see the people crowding against you," his disciples answered, "and yet you can ask, 'Who touched me?'"

But Jesus kept looking around to see who had done it.

Then the woman, knowing what had happened to her, came and fell at his feet and, trembling with fear, told him the whole truth.

He said to her, "Daughter, your faith has healed you. Go in peace and be freed from your suffering."

Like much of the Gospels, the passage above is written in code. Its meaning is not hidden, but, to unpack what is said, it's necessary for the reader to have spiritual experience.

There are two very interesting concepts dealt with here. First is the "dynamikos" (power) of Jesus, and second is the "pistis" (belief) of the woman who is healed.

"Dynamikos" is at the root of modern words like dynamism. It is usually translated here as "power" or "virtue."

When we see this word translated as the latter, we see its relationship etymologically with the Sanskrit and Pali words "virya" and "viriya" (via the prefix "vir").

"Pistis" is usually translated as "faith." But, I might choose the more neutral word here "belief." This way we can understand "pistis" without the associations that go along with the modern word "faith."

So, what is the meaning of this passage? Well, quite plainly, it seems to be explaining the mechanics of miracles. The woman is healed by her belief (pistis) when she possesses the power (dynamikos) of Jesus.

Jesus physically senses the power go out of him. When he looks for who touched him, the disciples don't understand what he is doing. The woman then admits to Jesus what she's done, and Jesus praises her, explaining that the power had effect because of her belief.

edited thread name

[Jhanananda]

While I am willing to consider that all, or most, of the miracle stories in all of the religions are meant to be metaphorical, or possibly dream sequences; nonetheless, the devout tend to take them literally, which is a serious problem for all mystics.

I do no miracles.  I do not walk on water, nor do I levitate.  However, once I reported that I do all of the subjective miraculous phenomena (maha-phala), such as: the 8 stages of the religious experience; travel out-of-body; recollection of previous lifetimes; intuitive revelatory insight, and psychic intuition; then people assumed that I can do the super man thing.  Or, if I cannot, then they assume that I just do not know the "technique." 

Believing that miracles are simply the product of a technique, or mantra, is the core of the problem.  The technique is what keeps one a stream winner or below.  Dumping the technique is what one has to do to move past the first stage of the religious experience. 

So, I have negotiated all 8 stages of the religious experience.  I manifest all of the superior fruit of attainment (maha-phala), but I cannot levitate a bubble, or a stream of smoke, nor do I care to.  So, what does that tell you? 

It tells me that all of the miracle stories in all of the religious literature of the world is at best a metaphor or dream sequence that was taken literally.  At worst all of the miracle stories in all of the religious literature of the world is propaganda/aggressive marketing hype to sell one religion over an other purely for profit and job security for the priesthood.

[Alexander]

Keep in mind as I write this my starting point -is- the concept that the miracles of Jesus are meant to be read figuratively. It is important to understand this implicitly, as otherwise it will just sound like I am putting forth superstition. Thus what I am saying is not based on a childlike reading, but a mature one, in which, after many years, it has become plausible to me that some of the miracle accounts are authentic.

In my opinion, the most plausible miracles involve Jesus' ability to (1) bless, (2) curse, (3) heal, and (4) exorcise. I am choosing the Gospel of Mark as the source of these, because Mark is the earliest of the Gospels.

5 They went across the lake to the region of the Gerasenes.[a] 2 When Jesus got out of the boat, a man with an impure spirit came from the tombs to meet him. 3 This man lived in the tombs, and no one could bind him anymore, not even with a chain. 4 For he had often been chained hand and foot, but he tore the chains apart and broke the irons on his feet. No one was strong enough to subdue him. 5 Night and day among the tombs and in the hills he would cry out and cut himself with stones.

6 When he saw Jesus from a distance, he ran and fell on his knees in front of him. 7 He shouted at the top of his voice, “What do you want with me, Jesus, Son of the Most High God? In God’s name don’t torture me!” 8 For Jesus had said to him, “Come out of this man, you impure spirit!”

9 Then Jesus asked him, “What is your name?”

“My name is Legion,” he replied, “for we are many.” 10 And he begged Jesus again and again not to send them out of the area.

[...]

15 When [people] came to Jesus, they saw the man who had been possessed by the legion of demons, sitting there, dressed and in his right mind; and they were afraid.

Perhaps exorcism is interwoven with being a good psychologist, as well as holiness. The "demoniac," who in modern terms we would call mentally ill, spends time in the company of Jesus, and through this he is brought to a clean state of mind.

35 While Jesus was still speaking, some people came from the house of Jairus, the synagogue leader. “Your daughter is dead,” they said. “Why bother the teacher anymore?”

36 Overhearing[c] what they said, Jesus told him, “Don’t be afraid; just believe.”

37 He did not let anyone follow him except Peter, James and John the brother of James. 38 When they came to the home of the synagogue leader, Jesus saw a commotion, with people crying and wailing loudly. 39 He went in and said to them, “Why all this commotion and wailing? The child is not dead but asleep.” 40 But they laughed at him.

After he put them all out, he took the child’s father and mother and the disciples who were with him, and went in where the child was. 41 He took her by the hand and said to her, “Talitha koum!” (which means “Little girl, I say to you, get up!”). 42 Immediately the girl stood up and began to walk around (she was twelve years old). At this they were completely astonished. 43 He gave strict orders not to let anyone know about this, and told them to give her something to eat.

This seems to be a healing of the girl when she is in a very ambiguous time between being alive and dead. Again, critical is the belief (pistis) of Jesus. Never once does he doubt that the girl is asleep. Everyone even laughs at him and calls him a fool, because they see he seriously thinks she is sleeping.

12 The next day as they were leaving Bethany, Jesus was hungry. 13 Seeing in the distance a fig tree in leaf, he went to find out if it had any fruit. When he reached it, he found nothing but leaves, because it was not the season for figs. 14 Then he said to the tree, “May no one ever eat fruit from you again.” And his disciples heard him say it.

[...]

20 In the morning, as they went along, they saw the fig tree withered from the roots. 21 Peter remembered and said to Jesus, “Rabbi, look! The fig tree you cursed has withered!”

22 “Have faith in God,” Jesus answered. 23 “Truly[f] I tell you, if anyone says to this mountain, ‘Go, throw yourself into the sea,’ and does not doubt in their heart but believes that what they say will happen, it will be done for them.

The curse of the fig tree is interesting because it seems like an unintentional act by Jesus. He spontaneously says to the tree, "may no one eat from you," but, since he says it with belief, the next day the tree has withered. This could be a warning to anyone who is advanced spiritually. Beware of what you say with conviction, because a blessing or a curse could have real effect.

[Jhanananda]

One of the many problems I have, aglorincz, with the Christian Gospels as they have been translated and interpreted for 17 centuries, is they are all translated with an emphasis upon "believing that Jesus Christ was the only begotten son of God, who died for your sins," full stop.  When in actuality all of these central premises are based upon profound translation errors.

1) Jesus was a Nazarite, not a guy who came from a fictitious town called "Nazareth."
2) He was the son of Adam, not man, which meant he was just like the rest of us.
3) He was the "chosen son of god" not "only begotten."  In the Abrahamic epistemology we are all children of god.
4) Jesus' "way truth and life" was not just believing in him, but living his lifestyle, which was the Nazarite lifestyle.

The Gospels will have to be completely re-translated to expunge these deeply erroneous biases to get closer the the true life and teachings of Jesus.

[Alexander]

One of the many problems I have, aglorincz, with the Christian Gospels as they have been translated and interpreted for 17 centuries, is they are all translated with an emphasis upon "believing that Jesus Christ was the only begotten son of God, who died for your sins," full stop.  When in actuality all of these central premises are based upon profound translation errors.

1) Jesus was a Nazarite, not a guy who came from a fictitious town called "Nazareth."
2) He was the son of Adam, not man, which meant he was just like the rest of us.
3) He was the "chosen son of god" not "only begotten."  In the Abrahamic epistemology we are all children of god.
4) Jesus' "way truth and life" was not just believing in him, but living his lifestyle, which was the Nazarite lifestyle.

The Gospels will have to be completely re-translated to expunge these deeply erroneous biases to get closer the the true life and teachings of Jesus.

I like #2 especially. I had never had "Son of Man" explained as a self-effacing title in that way before. That makes sense.

I think that Jesus is undoubtedly one of the most unique people to have ever lived, and the conventional Christian lines do not even remotely give us an understanding of him. The popular consciousness is polluted with all sorts of erroneous understandings of Jesus: and, while these understandings may have many partial truths to them, to get a real understanding of Jesus a large amount of study and reflection is required.

One concept worth considering is the orthodox Christian dogma of theosis. This is technically a tenet of both Catholicism and Orthodoxy. Two church fathers, Athanasius and Augustine, were major proponents of it. The idea is something like this: Jesus became God (or a god); thus, men can become gods. This means that it is possible for human beings to transcend their humanity through an imitation of Jesus.

Some other things I have considered in reflecting on Jesus is to see him as an Essene, a member of a group of Jewish eremites and ascetics. It is also possible that Jesus was a follower of John the Baptist, which would explain why the Gospel authors are so concerned with explaining Jesus' relationship to him.

One of the things I have also considered is to see Jesus as a "Master," i.e., as a magician - someone who, in the 1st century AD, was influenced by the schools of magic in Persia. Gurdjieff and Eliphas Levi both interpreted Jesus in this way. One of the Renaissance Tarot cards, the Hanged Man, also depicts Jesus in this way, with an image that conflates the magician with the mystic.

[Jhanananda]

I like #2 especially. I had never had "Son of Man" explained as a self-effacing title in that way before. That makes sense.

I think that Jesus is undoubtedly one of the most unique people to have ever lived, and the conventional Christian lines do not even remotely give us an understanding of him. The popular consciousness is polluted with all sorts of erroneous understandings of Jesus: and, while these understandings may have many partial truths to them, to get a real understanding of Jesus a large amount of study and reflection is required.

One concept worth considering is the orthodox Christian dogma of theosis. This is technically a tenet of both Catholicism and Orthodoxy. Two church fathers, Athanasius and Augustine, were major proponents of it. The idea is something like this: Jesus became God (or a god); thus, men can become gods. This means that it is possible for human beings to transcend their humanity through an imitation of Jesus.

The historic record of the Christian Church clearly indicates that the deeply flawed version of Christian Doctrine begins with Constantine, which means the problems have to be with the Orthodox Churches as well as the Catholic Churches.  And, the Nicene Council is proof of that, because the whole point of the first council was to establish the divinity of Jesus, which the Persians rejected, which became known as the Persian Heresy.

Some other things I have considered in reflecting on Jesus is to see him as an Essene, a member of a group of Jewish eremites and ascetics. It is also possible that Jesus was a follower of John the Baptist, which would explain why the Gospel authors are so concerned with explaining Jesus' relationship to him.

One of the things I have also considered is to see Jesus as a "Master," i.e., as a magician - someone who, in the 1st century AD, was influenced by the schools of magic in Persia. Gurdjieff and Eliphas Levi both interpreted Jesus in this way. One of the Renaissance Tarot cards, the Hanged Man, also depicts Jesus in this way, with an image that conflates the magician with the mystic.

Well, Jesus may not have been an Essene, but there might have been influences from them in him.  And, I will agree that there are definite suggests in the Gospels that Jesus may have had Persian influences. Most significantly are the so-called "three kings" who visited him as a child.  The original term used in the Greek version of the Gospels was 'magi' and a magi is the name for a Zoroastrian priest, which is an ancient Persian religion.

There are numerous problems with the Greco-Roman Christian Doctrine, as detailed up thread. Additionally we only know about the Essenes from the Essene scrolls that were found buried.  Why were they buried?  They were buried because the Orthodox Church went out to destroy anything that proved their version of Christian Doctrine was deeply flawed.  This is the same reason why the Nag Hammadi Texts were buried in a cave.  These documents were buried to protect them from destruction by the Orthodox Church, not the Catholic Church.