• Security incident: ISF was recently accessed by intruders. Please change your password, and change it anywhere else you used it. Read more

Jesus was a faker cultist... not a god!!

psionl0 said:
... You won't find any of that sanctioned in the Sermon on the Mount which pretty much supercedes the old testament.
Click to expand...

Which proves that Jesus was a false prophet that YHWH warned against....
  • Deuteronomy 4:2 Ye shall not add unto the word which I command you, neither shall ye diminish ought from it, that ye may keep the commandments of YHWH your God which I command you.
  • Deuteronomy 4:40 Thou shalt keep therefore his statutes, and his commandments, which I command thee this day, that it may go well with thee, and with thy children after thee, and that thou mayest prolong thy days upon the earth, which YHWH thy God giveth thee, for ever.

And YHWH warned precisely about this kind of false prophet
  • Deuteronomy 13:1-5 If there arise among you a prophet, or a dreamer of dreams, and giveth thee a sign or a wonder, and the sign or the wonder come to pass... Thou shalt not hearken unto the words of that prophet, or that dreamer of dreams: for YHWH your God proveth you, to know whether ye love YHWH your God with all your heart and with all your soul... keep his commandments... and that prophet, or that dreamer of dreams, shall be put to death...
 
psionl0 said:
... You won't find any of that sanctioned in the Sermon on the Mount which pretty much supercedes the old testament.
Click to expand...

Which is a load of imbecilic and even heinous claptrap....

This verse alone has caused more misery and strife and injustice and abuse and agony for women and even some men than any idea humanity has ever come up with...
  • Matthew 5:32 But I say unto you, That whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery: and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced committeth adultery.


 
TBH, I wouldn't even say Jesus was a faker cultist. Maybe he was, maybe he wasn't. Maybe he never even existed. The problem is that all the information chain to him seems to go through Paul, who is very much opaque. He insists that he isn't transmitting anything he got from any man. He's only talking about the Jesus in his visions. Not even from the other apostles, not even after he actually physically lived in Peter's house for a while. He still says that nah, he didn't learn anything new.

And really, Paul is very much opaque. He sends dozens of letters (we know there are more than those in the bible) literally two dozen pages long each, obsessing about Jesus, and yet he feels absolutely no need to transmit anything about Jesus. Well, with one exception: the last supper. But anything else, he doesn't give a flip to tell the parishioners anything that mortal Jesus actually said or did.

Even when according to the later gospels (assuming for a moment they're not just fiction, which they probably are), Jesus had already said "do X" or "don't do Y" or gave a parable to that effect, Paul doesn't even mention it. He gives his own convoluted reasoning on the topic, or does weak-sauce fallacies for why you should do X or not do Y. You know, instead of going "dude, it's not just my brain-fart, Jesus himself ordered that."

He has the perfect appeal to authority there, but nope, he never uses it.

And we have the problem that even in his own account, there seem to be significant differences between what he understood from it and what the other apostles understood from it. Like, he seems to be the only one who thinks there even should be a ministry to the gentiles. So did Jesus actually say anything to that effect? James and Peter seem to never have heard of it. Or Paul is the only one who seems to think the rules in the OT no longer applies, while Peter seems to think he still shouldn't eat what the OT forbids. So did Jesus actually say it no longer applies? Peter never heard of that. Nor did James in Acts. In fact, given that those restrictions would only stop when the messianic age has begun, did Peter or James even actually think that was the case?

And even relying on the gospels, as I was saying in other threads, at most 30% of anything they put into Jesus's mouth can be reasonably said by the same person with a coherent world view. He's a composite of the opinions of at least 4 different people. (Hmmm... 4 gospel authors, and they give Jesus the opinions of 4 different people... I wonder if there is any connection there...;))

We don't really know WTH Jesus actually said, and if he actually was adding much of his own to the law.


Anyway, TL;DR: I think it's more accurate to say that Paul was the weird cultist. (And as I keep saying, quite probably schizophrenic too.)
 
Last edited:
The Great Zaganza said:
Being a liar doesn't disqualify you from being a God.
Plenty of Deities have lied.
Click to expand...

Yes... but he says he is not god with his words and his actions...
  • Luke 18:19 19 And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? none is good, save one, that is, God.
  • Matthew 26:39 He went a little farther and fell on His face, and prayed, saying, “O My Father, if it is possible, let this cup pass from Me; nevertheless, not as I will, but as You will.”
  • John 20:17 Jesus said to her, “Do not cling to Me, for I have not yet ascended to My Father; but go to My brethren and say to them, ‘I am ascending to My Father and your Father, and to My God and your God.’ ”
 
HansMustermann said:
<snip lots of great stuff just for brevity>

Anyway, TL;DR: I think it's more accurate to say that Paul was the weird cultist. (And as I keep saying, quite probably schizophrenic too.)
Click to expand...


Yes on all of it :thumbsup:... in the rational and REAL REALITY.... but I am humoring the believers and talking from the fairy tales' universe point of view ... which believers believe is reality.

In reality the gospels are cultist propaganda and spin and even Paul admits himself to being a beguiling crafty pretender who pretended to be all things to all people just so as to peddle Jesus more easily.

 
Last edited:
Some New Testament scholars, like Bart Ehrman, think that a historical Jesus was simply an Apocalyptic preaching the imminent arrival of the “Son of Man” who was to make everything right for the world…. And especially the Jews.
Free them from the Romans, re-establish the 12 tribes, rebuild the Temple, etc.

The Romans saw this as sedition and did their thing, leaving his followers to invent an entirely different scenario in the decades following his death.
Nothing in the Gospels has any historical validity.
 
Haha, I recently saw that ancient old movie, that's something of a cult thing so it's possible some others here may have seen it as well. Maybe even seen it back when, if you happen to be of a certain vintage! I'm talking about Monty Python's Life of Brian.

Lovely movie, had me ROFLing away. Amazing, actually, considering that it was made way way back when, and considering that a movie like this would be considered "brave", even if it were made today. Might conceivably actually be banned in some places, even. And they made it, I don't know, thirty, forty years ago!

Anyway, my point is, it's fiction obviously, but it's interesting, their depiction of how that place, all reeking with poverty and disease and squalor and ignorance and rank superstition as it was, it was super fertile ground for some crazy schizo to get hailed as messiah, and super fertile ground for some crazy cult to take hold. As many did, including our fish cult that grew into this world-straddling monstrosity.
 
Last edited:
My own father had convinced himself that he had established a near direct line to god himself. Not via Jesus but as his cult was more OT/Jewish in base via the bible. Which he knew inside out and backwards. He spent 30 years of his life reading it daily.

Two millennia ago in a place under Roman occupation many had little but thier religious beliefs and a daily grind job. One taking away the will to live and the other giving hope of a brighter afterlife if life wasn't likely to improve.
Many would have been similar to my father, preaching hope and somehow someone would free them of the Roman oppression, poverty and hardship.

Combine enough blurred memories of small time preachers and old mythology into a cloth of some type, it may look a lot like modern Jesus.
Especially when individuals who became threads in it are lost to time and history.

It was established in the " historical Jesus" thread he would have been a very busy boy if everything said of him was historical fact. To the point of being in two places at once.
Go with the obvious here, something isn't right about him
 
I'm in the 'no historical Jesus' camp. He was a made-up person about 50-100 years after the supposed fact because those preaching the 'new' religion needed a hero-god to entice potential followers.
 
Leumas said:
Yes... but he says he is not god with his words and his actions...
  • Luke 18:19 19 And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good? none is good, save one, that is, God.
  • Matthew 26:39 He went a little farther and fell on His face, and prayed, saying, “O My Father, if it is possible, let this cup pass from Me; nevertheless, not as I will, but as You will.”
  • John 20:17 Jesus said to her, “Do not cling to Me, for I have not yet ascended to My Father; but go to My brethren and say to them, ‘I am ascending to My Father and your Father, and to My God and your God.’ ”
Click to expand...

Well, at the time he was saying that, it wasn't really clear that Jesus even was God. He was coy about the whole thing, himself, until the end -at least according to the Gospel of John. Most modern Christian denominations believe that his trial, death and resurrection was when he was actually revealed to be God, part of the Trinity. Of course, the whole Trinity thing is a later retcon to the comic book, if you will. Then there are nontrinitarians who believe that Jesus was divine, but not the same thing as God. And there are some who believe that Jesus was just a man, The Chosen One, The Messiah, the one who was chosen by God to spread his message and be the future King of Israel.

But I must say, your title is misleading. You haven't actually made an argument that Jesus was a "faker cultist." If there was a Historical Jesus, then I see no reason why he couldn't have been sincere in his beliefs. Deluded, perhaps, but sincere.
 
One new thread after another.

I don’t think we can say Jesus was a faker. I don’t think we can say anything about Jesus. Only about what others said about him and what they say he said. In fact, we don't really know who those others were.

The four Gospels are anonymous copies of copies of copies. The earliest of those were written 30 years after his reported death. 3 of the 4 were copied from each other or another source. It's ridiculous to think they could be accurate other than generally and maybe not even that.

Why would I argue that Jesus was a faker when we know so little about him or that he actually existed?
 
acbytesla said:
One new thread after another.

I don’t think we can say Jesus was a faker. I don’t think we can say anything about Jesus. Only about what others said about him and what they say he said. In fact, we don't really know who those others were.

The four Gospels are anonymous copies of copies of copies. The earliest of those were written 30 years after his reported death. 3 of the 4 were copied from each other or another source. It's ridiculous to think they could be accurate other than generally and maybe not even that.

Why would I argue that Jesus was a faker when we know so little about him or that he actually existed?
Click to expand...

Thank you for saving me the trouble of writing all of that myself.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Share this page

ISF - Join now!

Every member here is approved by hand. No bots, no spam, just people who care about evidence and honest debate.

Membership is free!

Create your free account

Back
Top Bottom