Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Most of this unfortunate business came about as a result of church leaders in the centuries before and after Constantine doing everything they could to build up the figure of Jesus as a Deity so they could demand worship of Him, which would then put them in positions of extreme power, to the extent that the Church eventually became more powerful than the kings.
It involved, of course, rewriting the scriptures in ways you point out--adding here, deleting there, changing here, fabricating there until they had all the books in the Bible they wanted and left out all the books they didn't want, which then pretty much strengthened their hand and crippled their rivals'.
Bingo. Hit it right on the head.
I don't fault anyone for believing what they want or what gives them comfort in their daily lives. I just take offense when Tanakh is completely twisted to give a blasphemer this kind of hold on people.
Not only that, but Paul specifically says that he did not get his information from eye witnesses, but from "heavenly visions" (which is to say, from in between his own ears). It is exceedingly odd that he did not think it important or relevant to learn all he could about Jesus and his teachings from Peter and the others. Paul's writings are among the earliest in the NT, and most of the original players should have still been alive. Indeed, if I recall correctly, he is supposed to have met some of them personally.
Paul's first letter to the Corinthians, written circa 55 ce, in fact represents the very first mention EVER, historically, of the resurrection of Jesus from the dead. Jesus was executed, according to the time frame established by the Gospels, circa 27-30 ce. In other words, the most significant event in human history, according to Christians, created not the slightest ripple of impact at all at the time it was supposed to have occurred, nor would anyone bother to record the story at all for about a quarter of a century after the signature claim, the resurrection of Jesus from the dead, was supposed to have occurred. And then we are informed that the impossible occurred by an individual, Paul, who clearly was not personally present to witness what he is claiming occurred. But perhaps even more significant is that the very people in the best position to have known what actually occurred, the Jewish population of Jerusalem, never believed the story at all, but considered the story to be a hoax perpetrated by the followers of Jesus. It is in fact the obvious conclusion.
Based on Christ's actual impact on history and religion as prophesied . . . it is self-confirming. We can quibble over whether this or that actually happened or was real or whatever . . . but the simple truth is that Christ has been the Messiah, has been the cornerstone that was rejected, has had Europe's Gentile Kings revere Him, etc. etc. etc. It is hard to argue with accomplished fact . . . whatever the original impetus was.
Based on Christ's actual impact on history and religion as prophesied . . . it is self-confirming. We can quibble over whether this or that actually happened or was real or whatever . . . but the simple truth is that Christ has been the Messiah, has been the cornerstone that was rejected, has had Europe's Gentile Kings revere Him, etc. etc. etc. It is hard to argue with accomplished fact . . . whatever the original impetus was.
Ever hear of a self fulfilling prophecy? You know, where the desired result is known and some work to make sure, in their opinions, it occurs?
Accomplished fact? Only by those with an interest in it happening. Nothing to do with the truth.
Paul's first letter to the Corinthians, written circa 55 ce, in fact represents the very first mention EVER, historically, of the resurrection of Jesus from the dead. Jesus was executed, according to the time frame established by the Gospels, circa 27-30 ce. In other words, the most significant event in human history, according to Christians, created not the slightest ripple of impact at all at the time it was supposed to have occurred, nor would anyone bother to record the story at all for about a quarter of a century after the signature claim, the resurrection of Jesus from the dead, was supposed to have occurred. And then we are informed that the impossible occurred by an individual, Paul, who clearly was not personally present to witness what he is claiming occurred. But perhaps even more significant is that the very people in the best position to have known what actually occurred, the Jewish population of Jerusalem, never believed the story at all, but considered the story to be a hoax perpetrated by the followers of Jesus. It is in fact the obvious conclusion.
Yes. And most of what Paul has to say about Jesus looks like prototypes that were fleshed out and "improved on" by the much later gospel accounts, because he seems to be suggesting most of the time that Jesus is less flesh and blood than an apparition, too. The fully god / fully human paradox had not been invented yet; one can almost sense the struggle to decide what Jesus was going to be presented as.
But because the gospels come first in the NT, we tend to let them color Paul's teachings. If you understand the chronological order of authorship, you realize that Paul's teachings were the FIRST and ONLY ones available at the time in writing, at least that anyone knows of.
Finally, why did Paul go to such lengths to explain and justify many of his teachings when he could have simply cited Jesus as the authority behind them? That seems odd too, especially when taken with his preening about these teachings being given him directly in a vision of heaven.
It is not inconceivable given all the above that Paul is the original source of these teachings which were later retrospectively incorporated into the gospel accounts.
I don't fault anyone for believing what they want or what gives them comfort in their daily lives. I just take offense when Tanakh is completely twisted to give a blasphemer this kind of hold on people.
Just so you are aware, some Christians do acknowledge the changes and re-interpretations made in the Tanakh/OT to bolster Christianity. Sometimes the more thoughtful and deeper sides of Christianity get lost in the arguments on these forums.
My church observes the liturgical calendar, and we are in the season of Lent, a time of reflection leading up to the celebration of our most sacred holy day. We are doing a Lenten study series in my church, and that was precisely the lesson given by priest today: That Christ did not fulfill the Jewish expectation of the Messiah. The idea is not that the Christians were tricked by a con man or the Jews were too stupid to see God right in front of them or any of the other finger-pointing that goes back and forth when people are shrieking that THEIR religion is the RIGHT one. We believe that Christ gave the Gentiles the opportunity to know God, yet God did not abandon his covenant with the Jews or tell them to stop keeping the laws they were given.
However, many Christians ARE taught that the Tanakh texts foreshadow the coming of Christ. I was brought up in a denomination that believed that and only through conversations with some Jewish women online in an interreligious group did I learn, for example, that Jews do not view the Garden of Eden story with the snake getting his head crushed by the man's heel as a foreshadowing of the triumph of good over evil. Growing up, I was led to believe that Jews also believed this, but that they just didn't think that Jesus of Nazareth was the guy.
Now I'm more aware of the mistranslations and interpretations of passages of Jewish Scripture by Christians, but many others are not. Rather than affect offense, why not educate? Wait--I do know an answer to that. Some will simply not be educated and will argue with you that you don't know what your own holy writ means. In that case, take a hint from our founder. "Shake the dust from your feet" and walk away. But, again, I learned only because some nice Jewish women took the time to have a thoughtful and intelligent conversation with me about what their belief really entailed.
Based on Christ's actual impact on history and religion as prophesied . . . it is self-confirming. We can quibble over whether this or that actually happened or was real or whatever . . . but the simple truth is that Christ has been the Messiah, has been the cornerstone that was rejected, has had Europe's Gentile Kings revere Him, etc. etc. etc. It is hard to argue with accomplished fact . . . whatever the original impetus was.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arjay51
Ever hear of a self fulfilling prophecy? You know, where the desired result is known and some work to make sure, in their opinions, it occurs?
Accomplished fact? Only by those with an interest in it happening. Nothing to do with the truth.
If everything said about Christ happened during the 1st century . . . your conspiracy idea (like Schonfeld's "Passover Plot") might make sense. But to suggest that Christ and His followers could project His impact 2000+ years into the future stretches credulity. I will take His historical IMPACT over millennia as more than sufficient validation of His status.
If everything said about Christ happened during the 1st century . . . your conspiracy idea (like Schonfeld's "Passover Plot") might make sense. But to suggest that Christ and His followers could project His impact 2000+ years into the future stretches credulity. I will take His historical IMPACT over millennia as more than sufficient validation of His status.
Prostitution has had an IMPACT over millennia, too; in fact, more millennia than Christianity can claim. So?
This goes back to my 2nd wife's assertion that since belief in an afterlife is so prevalent now and throughout history, then there must be one. I say if that belief is so prevalent then it proves nothing other than that it's prevalent. Prevalence can be caused by many things, including persistent tendencies to misinterpret certain things, or to see patterns where they don't exist -- all well known and documented human perceptual and cognitive quirks.
Thinking something is so doesn't make it so.
Billions of people CAN be wrong, even repeatedly. For centuries if not millennia they also believed that blood-letting was an effective medical treatment, that there were four elements, and in one part of the world, that thunder was the sound of a god's hammer.
Yes. And most of what Paul has to say about Jesus looks like prototypes that were fleshed out and "improved on" by the much later gospel accounts, because he seems to be suggesting most of the time that Jesus is less flesh and blood than an apparition, too. The fully god / fully human paradox had not been invented yet; one can almost sense the struggle to decide what Jesus was going to be presented as.
But because the gospels come first in the NT, we tend to let them color Paul's teachings. If you understand the chronological order of authorship, you realize that Paul's teachings were the FIRST and ONLY ones available at the time in writing, at least that anyone knows of.
Finally, why did Paul go to such lengths to explain and justify many of his teachings when he could have simply cited Jesus as the authority behind them? That seems odd too, especially when taken with his preening about these teachings being given him directly in a vision of heaven.
It is not inconceivable given all the above that Paul is the original source of these teachings which were later retrospectively incorporated into the gospel accounts.
I honestly don't think we need to look any farther than Matt.27:64 to explain the origin of the myth of the risen Jesus. An empty grave and a missing corpse are VASTLY more likely to be the result of actions taken by the living, then they are to be the result of actions taken by the corpse. As long as the followers of Jesus had the means, motive and opportunity to have relocated his body, which they clearly did, it is unreasonable in the extreme to reach the preposterous and frankly laughable conclusion that the corpse was responsible of it's own disappearance. Next, beginning in Acts 2, we have the followers of Jesus doing the very thing that the chief Jewish priests had expressed fear to Pilate that they intended to do all along, which was to spread the false rumor of the risen Jesus. It would take centuries yet for these early stories to blossom into what would become one of the world's greatest religions, but the earliest beginnings are right there in scripture. It is of course unthinkable for Christians to even consider the possibility that their entire world view is basically founded on lies and falsehoods, even as they smugly conclude and assert that all competing religions are in fact based on nothing more than lies and falsehoods. Because what religious person doesn't know full well, to the deepest part of their hearts, that THEIR belief is the true belief, and that of course it is EVERYONE ELSE who believes in nonsense?
Last edited by Tired of the Nonsense; 03-09-2014 at 03:04 PM..
Based on Christ's actual impact on history and religion as prophesied . . . it is self-confirming. We can quibble over whether this or that actually happened or was real or whatever . . . but the simple truth is that Christ has been the Messiah, has been the cornerstone that was rejected, has had Europe's Gentile Kings revere Him, etc. etc. etc. It is hard to argue with accomplished fact . . . whatever the original impetus was.
Quote:
Originally Posted by MysticPhD
If everything said about Christ happened during the 1st century . . . your conspiracy idea (like Schonfeld's "Passover Plot") might make sense. But to suggest that Christ and His followers could project His impact 2000+ years into the future stretches credulity. I will take His historical IMPACT over millennia as more than sufficient validation of His status.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mordant
Prostitution has had an IMPACT over millennia, too; in fact, more millennia than Christianity can claim. So?
I would normally expect a better response from you than this straw man, mordant. Really!
Quote:
This goes back to my 2nd wife's assertion that since belief in an afterlife is so prevalent now and throughout history, then there must be one. I say if that belief is so prevalent then it proves nothing other than that it's prevalent. Prevalence can be caused by many things, including persistent tendencies to misinterpret certain things, or to see patterns where they don't exist -- all well known and documented human perceptual and cognitive quirks.
Where in all this evolved ability is the prescience to forecast impacts that will not exist for centuries or millennia???
Quote:
Billions of people CAN be wrong, even repeatedly. For centuries if not millennia they also believed that blood-letting was an effective medical treatment, that there were four elements, and in one part of the world, that thunder was the sound of a god's hammer.
More rather poor straw men, mordant. You usually do so much better. You and I both decry the ancient ignorance and superstitions of our ignorant ancestors. I am talking about impacts that were forecast and in fact realized centuries and millennia AFTER Christ's appearance and death. How did He or His associates make that happen??
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
How Much of the Jesus Legend Is Real?
But, again, I learned only because some nice Jewish women took the time to have a thoughtful and intelligent conversation with me about what their belief really entailed.
