If you enjoy what you read here you will also enjoy my novel
21 days in May
Please be aware this blog may be considered Illegal almost anywhere!

The Great Deceiver

There are many instances in the bible where jesus talks with god, and many are performed outloud and before of a crowd.
God is supposed to know everything. Isn't he?
His son would surely know that? Wouldn't he? He would, right? 
He seems to know it anyway, 'from the horses mouth', his 'own' words in that book about him. So I reckon it's pretty fair to assume that the son of god would know that he didn't need to have ANY audible conversations with dad/god?
Indeed, would it be reasonable to further assume that for god to be kept up to speed about what's going on in his ONLY son's life, Jesus would only have had to think something? And Dad, being god and all, would know the thought in his son's head, possibly even before his son had thought it? And I don't want to get into the "God IS Jesus" nonsense but really, if he is 'him & himself', wouldn't he already know what he wanted to tell himself?
Oooh almost spiraled down the great fuzzy bollocks plughole there! Anyway to tidy up all those messy thoughts into what I'm actually pondering...

As any speech where Jesus is addressing God is unnecessary for communication, what is it's purpose?

To answer that I think we need to look at the second component to this 'Jesus speaks to God' paradigm that spangles the new testament. That is, as I mentioned at the top...
Outloud and before a crowd.
As we have already cast serious doubt on Jesus' need to communicate outloud with an all knowing father who is also himself, I feel it must be assumed that any conversation Jesus had with God which was outloud and before a crowd was ONLY to convince the crowd. An 'only for show' manipulation of his primitive fishermen and labourer followers.
He was pretending, play acting so that they would come to the conclusion he desired. (the conclusion that there is a god)

It may be argued that a manipulation 'merely to make his point' is excusable but I'd suggest it doesn't matter how favourable a truth is to a person, if they were led to it by foul means, they have been deceived. And I'd further suggest that for a 'supreme' being, any manipulation is a deception.

But if the entire speech at 'The Last Supper' is nothing more than a deception? What then? (The last supper sits somewhere in the region of John: Chapters 13 to 18) If that entire 'finale' is only an act, a last gasp convincer for his followers, then shouldn't Jesus (who is also god remember) be viewed as a deceiver?
And if he is 'him & himself' as 'they' suggest (God = Jesus) then doesn't that mean god is capable of deception too?

A god with the ability to tell lies?

Wouldn't that reduce one of the pillars of christian debate...
"god tells the truth, the bible is the word of god, the bible is the truth."
...to a pile of rubble?

At the very least, doesn't it place
every promise that god ever made
on very shaky ground?

And considered under this criteria, for whose benefit is his 'ultimate' speech?
What is the purpose of 'his' 'fine prose' whilst in 'agony' on the cross?
"Then said Jesus, Father, forgive them; for they know not what they do" Luke 23:34
Jesus' seemingly solely altruistic voice is not benign but manipulative, a deliberate deceit
So, who in the bible is the great deceiver?
Seems to me, on Biblical evidence
Jesus = Satan

This is one of the Too many questions


Please leave a comment - Anything will do
The best communications are often,

Back to the Core TMQ"


If you enjoy what you read here
you will also enjoy my novel
21 days in May

Please be aware this blog may be considered Illegal almost anywhere!

Get TMQ on your Kindle

Copyright Crispy Sea

No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, or otherwise, without the prior written permission of the publisher.

All blog posts copyright http://atheist.diatribes.co.uk

TMQCrispySea 2009-2014