This thread touches on a theological debate concerning whether Jesus explicitly claimed divinity in the canonical Gospels. The discussion reflects a mix of theological inquiry, sarcasm, and the characteristic wit often found on AutoAdmit.

Analysis of the Original Post and Responses:

Original Post: "Why didn’t Jesus ever claim to be divine?"

OP: "refried beans"

The subject line poses a provocative question that invites discussion or challenges the traditional Christian belief that Jesus claimed to be divine. The lack of body content suggests that the OP is either posing a rhetorical question or encouraging others to debate the topic.

Responses:

refried beans:

Response: No additional content.

Interpretation: The lack of follow-up content from the OP indicates that they may have intended to spark debate or controversy without further elaboration. It suggests a desire to provoke thought or disagreement.

potluck:

Response: "are you doing a “in gospel testimony deemed reliable by my standards” bit or are you genuinely not aware that he does in the canonical gospels?"

Interpretation: Potluck challenges the OP by suggesting that Jesus does claim divinity in the canonical Gospels, implying that the OP might be either uninformed or engaging in a deliberate misinterpretation. The phrasing indicates skepticism about the OP's knowledge or intent.

refried beans:

Response: "He never says that."

Interpretation: The OP doubles down on their original statement, asserting that Jesus never explicitly claimed to be divine. This response likely reflects a particular interpretation or a challenge to traditional readings of the Gospels.

https://imgur.com/a/IkQnGlr:

Response 1: "cr"

Interpretation: By stating "cr" (Credited Response), this poaster acknowledges agreement or support for refried beans' assertion. It suggests that they find the OP's statement to be a valid point or worthy of consideration.

Response 2: "referring to 'the canonical gospels' generically on this point is lol."

Interpretation: This response criticizes the idea of referring to the Gospels in a general sense, likely pointing out that the specific content and context of the Gospels matter in such a debate. The use of "lol" indicates a dismissive or mocking tone.

potluck:

Response: "so the latter?"

Interpretation: Potluck reiterates their skepticism, suggesting that refried beans might be uninformed rather than posing a serious theological argument. The question is rhetorical and carries a tone of condescension or disbelief.

https://imgur.com/a/IkQnGlr:

Response: "You say he is."

Interpretation: This comment seems to address the contradiction in claiming that Jesus never stated his divinity while others (including Christian doctrine) assert that he did. The phrasing suggests irony or a challenge to the OP's position, emphasizing the difference between what the OP says and what is traditionally believed.

Overall Themes:

Theological Debate: The thread centers around a fundamental theological question regarding Jesus' divinity, reflecting the ongoing debate among scholars, believers, and skeptics about the interpretation of the Gospels.

Provocation and Skepticism: The OP’s question seems designed to provoke thought or controversy, leading to responses that mix skepticism, irony, and challenge. The conversation illustrates how religious topics can be a battleground for differing interpretations and beliefs.

AutoAdmit Style: The responses exhibit AutoAdmit's typical blend of sarcasm, humor, and intellectual challenge, with posters questioning each other's knowledge and intent while inserting elements of irony and wit.

Conclusion:

This thread highlights how AutoAdmit users engage with complex theological questions, often with a mix of serious inquiry, sarcasm, and wit. The debate around whether Jesus claimed divinity in the canonical Gospels reflects broader discussions within religious studies and showcases the board's characteristic approach to challenging established ideas and encouraging debate.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5591461&forum_id=2Reputation#48067381)

The AutoAdmit thread titled "Why didn't Jesus ever claim to be divine?" initiated by "refried beans" sparked a brief but interesting theological discussion.

The initial post, lacking any body content, immediately prompted questions about the poster's intent and understanding of the gospels.

"potluck" stepped in to clarify whether "refried beans" was engaging in a selective reading of the gospels or was genuinely unaware of Jesus' claims to divinity within the texts considered canonical by most Christians.

"refried beans" doubled down, asserting that Jesus never explicitly made such a claim. This statement seems to indicate either a limited understanding of the gospels or a deliberate challenge to the traditional interpretation.

The user "https://imgur.com/a/IkQnGlr" entered the conversation with a multi-faceted response. They directly contradicted "refried beans," stating "You say he is," implying that the gospels do portray Jesus as divine. They also criticized the generic use of the term "canonical gospels," suggesting that different gospels may present varying perspectives on Jesus' divinity and that a nuanced approach is necessary.

"potluck" concluded that "refried beans" seemed genuinely unaware of the relevant passages in the gospels, highlighting a potential gap in their understanding of Christian theology.

In essence, this thread touched upon a fundamental question in Christianity: Did Jesus claim to be divine? While "refried beans" expressed doubt, others in the thread pointed to the gospels as evidence supporting Jesus' divine claims. The discussion also hinted at the complexities of biblical interpretation and the diversity of perspectives within Christianity.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5591461&forum_id=2Reputation#48067385)

ftfy

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5591461&forum_id=2Reputation#48067409)

ty

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5591461&forum_id=2Reputation#48067432)

Jesus said to them, “I am the bread of life; whoever comes to me shall not hunger, and whoever believes in me shall never thirst.”

Jn 6:35

Jesus said to him, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me. If you had known me, you would have known my Father also. From now on you do know him and have seen him.”

Jn 14:6

“Your father Abraham rejoiced that he would see my day. He saw it and was glad.” So the Jews said to him, “You are not yet fifty years old, and have you seen Abraham?” Jesus said to them, “Truly, truly, I say to you, before Abraham was, I am.” So they picked up stones to throw at him, but Jesus hid himself and went out of the temple.

Jn 8:55

My favorite:

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things were made through him, and without him was not any thing made that was made.

Jn 1:1

When day came, the assembly of the elders of the people gathered together, both chief priests and scribes. And they led him away to their council, and they said, “If you are the Christ, tell us.” But he said to them, “If I tell you, you will not believe, and if I ask you, you will not answer. But from now on the Son of Man shall be seated at the right hand of the power of God.” So they all said, “Are you the Son of God, then?” And he said to them, “You say that I am.” Then they said, “What further testimony do we need? We have heard it ourselves from his own lips.”

Lk 22:66

Jesus answered them, “I told you, and you do not believe. The works that I do in my Father’s name bear witness about me, but you do not believe because you are not among my sheep. My sheep hear my voice, and I know them, and they follow me. I give them eternal life, and they will never perish, and no one will snatch them out of my hand. My Father, who has given them to me, is greater than all, and no one is able to snatch them out of the Father’s hand. ***I and the Father are one***.”

Jn 10:25

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5591461&forum_id=2Reputation#48067477)

He: tends his flock like a shepherd: He gathers the lambs in his arms and carries them close to his heart; he gently leads those that have young.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5591461&forum_id=2Reputation#48067962)

He was just talking about spiritual matters. You are creating a very strange theory here

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5591461&forum_id=2Reputation#48068621)

Notice too the official version is that he told the authorities which one was Jesus. That's consistent with the theory that he fingered Jesus as the leader of the pack. There's no other sense in which Jesus needed to be "identified," since he was seen overturning the money changers tables just the day before.

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5591461&forum_id=2Reputation#48068671)

Yours in Christ

(http://www.autoadmit.com/thread.php?thread_id=5591461&forum_id=2Reputation#48070081)