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.
jesus, the teaching and theology of jesus, do very much exist. the teachings were radical and of extraordinary contrast to the cruel brutal mideast from which it sprung. his teaching exist forever in writing and in the hearts of millions.
jesus, the teaching and theology of jesus, do very much exist. the teachings were radical and of extraordinary contrast to the cruel brutal mideast from which it sprung. his teaching exist forever in writing and in the hearts of millions.
It seems to be a rather moot point . . . since there is no question that he exists and has done so for millennia. His impact on humanity and societal evolution is undeniable. Any one of us should hope to have such a "REAL" impact on the world, especially after we have departed this life!
How in the world can we have any knowledge of what any mythological beastie can do for/to us after we are dead? Obviously there are questions, have you been reading this forum at all? Has this mythological gay guy had an impact, and if so, not all impacts are beneficial, Hitler also had an impact and fewer people were killed in his name, the j guy is a myth and this myth is dangerous to human beings and all other critters. Notice in the first question I ask for knowledge, not mythological beliefs, I do not accept the bible as proof of anything other than, there are a lot of gullible people out there.
Has anyone read George Orwell's Nineteen Eighty-Four...he who controls the present controls the past. Who knows how much of what is written as history is true and how much has been changed to suit the needs of the powers that be of any time throughout history.
Too true. Lady Ice! Orwell should be absolutely required reading for any kid in order to get out of high school. There should be a scheduled annual "1984" play with a pre-play mini-play, "intro to politics", via his equally fascinating "Animal Farm". Plus an annual essay contest as to Where I Rooted Out "1984" Thought-Management in My Own Home Town!".
Even characters for which there is documented history and photos, such as George Armstrong Custer, are unabashedly and cosmetically dolled-up by successive correctionist / revisionist* historians. When I went to high school and studied American History (early '60s), George was painted as a great adventurer and savior of the West. Amazingly, there are those who, even now, protect his image and "good name" despite the emerging truth. What a spectacular ego-maniacal idiot, personally responsible for the deaths of hundreds, and also for perpetrating the myth of our own godly and righteous intents. Along with a carefully constructed mythic story of his basic wonderful-ness and good intents, yet frustrated by "the man". Sound familiar?
*Re: revisionist: I also see this type of approach now surfacing with increasing regularity in the defenders of Christianity. Given the irrefutable advances in, and evidence of, the scientific approach's successes in answering many of life's little questions, the church has slowly adopted to some of the principles of, say, evolution, mass-extinction of dinosaurs, and an accurate Earth chronology that stretches back millions of years before the bible's innocent and naive proclamations. To refute such obvious facts would, frankly, eventually diminish them in the sceptical eyes of their once uneducated BSMs (Bleating Sheeple Masses). Even the most basic middle school education is going to generate a percentage of sceptics which will grow exponentially as we slowly evolve as a culture. In the end, knowledge will "out", and the old-school blind acceptors will pass. As will the idea of an actual Jesus. And, eventually, God.
Y'know, I have to admit, never having spent a lot of time researching it, that I always assumed there was a JC, just that he was, perhaps, a true historic well-known scholarly hippy-type philosopher who wandered about giving essentially good ideas on how to live better with your fellow-citizens. Now that you mention it though, the total lack of written evidence other than that very questionable source, The Holy Bible, is a bit suspicious. It also fits with the need to have a convenient idol, a focal point for belief.
Man, here are the obvious effects of relentless fear-mongering and proselytizing, starting in Sunday School with Mrs. Jones' guilt-inducing finger-wagging (remember? I sure do!), and carrying on through several world and local wars ("God is on your side, soldier! Now go forth and mercilously SLAUGHTER those heathens, in God's name!").... it's obscene.
I'll assume that Jesus may have existed, but the son of a god? When there is no evidence of such a mythic uber-person? Nah.... (circular "it's true because the bible, which is all true, says it's true because it's in the bible, which is all true..." arguments aside).
Thanks for this thread. It's got me thinking about the further ramifications of pseudo-faiths.
jesus, the teaching and theology of jesus, do very much exist. the teachings were radical and of extraordinary contrast to the cruel brutal mideast from which it sprung. his teaching exist forever in writing and in the hearts of millions.
Revisionists down the ages have been prone to putting any words they like into Jesus' mouth when it suited their agenda. We'll probably never know what exactly Jesus stood for, but there are many contradictions to be reconciled.
Jesus is reported to have said, for instance, that he had not come to change a single jot of the Mosaic Law, yet in other places he is seen telling people that healing the sick is more important than following any such law regarding the strict observance of the Jewish Sabbath. He was often criticised for the company he kept, for eating and drinking with all manner of 'sinners'... much to the horror of his companions.
He came, as he says, to set man against man, and family members against each other in the name of the Kingdom of God, and even snubbed his own mother harshly on at least one occasion. In contrast we see the Jesus who loved little children, and advised victims to turn the other cheek when under attack, only to kick over the moneylenders' stalls at the Temple in a raging temper... And so on... Doctrinally speaking, the story is all over the place.
Yet another picture of him emerges in the 'banned' gospels, now well-known again after millennia of being 'lost', supposed destroyed by the early Church for being heretical.
All in all, I would say that Jesus was too enigmatic and ill-defined to be an invention, given so many unexplained contradictions re his personality. An out-and-out invention would probably be far more consistent and simplistic, truth often being more complicated than fiction.
Last edited by purplefig; 11-30-2008 at 03:24 PM..
All in all, I would say that Jesus was too enigmatic and ill-defined to be an invention, given so many unexplained contradictions re his personality. An out-and-out invention would probably be far more consistent and simplistic, truth often being more complicated than fiction.
This was exactly my point. It just seems more likely [in MY opinion] that some actual historical figure (the basis) existed in a time when "messiahs" were running around the Jewish landscape a dime a dozen. The need to continue believing in the hope that their messiah was the special one, one who was "special" because not even death could stop him, fueled the process of invention. I'm not sure these simple people had any clue how far their commemoration of their leader would go, but then comes a guy by the name of Paul, followed by an emperor's keen political move to legitimize an underground religion and we end up years later with the Jesus myth.
This was exactly my point. It just seems more likely [in MY opinion] that some actual historical figure (the basis) existed in a time when "messiahs" were running around the Jewish landscape a dime a dozen. go... (snip) ... but then comes a guy by the name of Paul, followed by an emperor's keen political move to legitimize an underground religion and we end up years later with the Jesus myth.
Whilst not being in any way an authority on this topic, at least I can say that my little library of books on the history and development of the Christian faith is probably as comprehensive as I can make it, and covers two whole walls of my room... On the basis of all my reading, then, I would venture the opinion that there is little room for doubt that Jesus did in fact exist as a man, albeit a real, human individual, and not a supernatural one.
What needs to be taken on board, however, whilst assessing what is known of him, is the degree of historical accuracy that can be attributed to the scriptural accounts, as they now stand, after all the complicated process of revision, selection, and suppression that took place in the first Centuries. A surprising amount of scholarly work has been devoted to unravelling the story of Jesus, going back to the 19th Century - all of it fascinating stuff.
No time to go into any of that now, but just to give an instance of the findings, we gather that there was indisputably a sort of pre-Christ figure, probably an Essene, (sometimes called 'The Teacher of Righteousness'), active some 100 years previous to Jesus, who delivered what is clearly an almost word-for-word version of Jesus' sermon on the mount. Since we traditionally associate the ideals of this sermon very closely with Jesus, being so central to his message, it isn't easy, I guess, to let go of that belief and accept that these may well be words put into Christ's mouth from a previous source.
And so it goes on - not to mention all the tampering that was normal at that time under the Jewish name 'pesher' - whereby it was seen as completely legitimate to take any Old Testament prophesy and make it relate directly, to (say), the story of the real Jesus, and to fit the two elements seamlessly together, using invention if neccessary... This practice, in a society that hadn't developed any notion comparable to our expectation of unadorned, accurate reportage, is responsible to a huge extent for the final shape of the stories we now see in the Gospels. Hence, Jesus appears to be a fulfilment of prophesy... typically, the prophesies of Isiah.
It would be naive to expect historical accuracy, since this is a relatively modern concept.
Last edited by purplefig; 12-01-2008 at 05:53 AM..
Did Jesus exist? I would say more than likely he did, but not in the context of the biblical Jesus. Although he may have been an radical for his time. Just because there is no proof outside of the bible and a token remark of him in the book Josephus wrote, doesn't discount his existance. I would ask, in 2000 years from now, will there be any proof that you ever existed.
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.
The Great Wool Eye-cover!
