Okay, convince me Jesus existed.

[The Norseman]

I should do some searches to see if there is such a thing as a religion with no God.

Just google "Alcoholics Anonymous."

 

[Mudcat]

I have to admit complete ignorance but it seems interesting enough to take a look at. May be important in future discussions to have at least some knowledge.

Wikipedia isn't a proper place to appreciate his works. You can read most of em here.

 

[I Ratant]

Off Topic:

Heh. No, I was not aware of that. There's now a third reason for me to visit Oz: the first is I really want to have a souvenir from the town called 'Tittybong' just because. Second, I have some friends who live there in Australia -- can't remember the first little town and then there are several who live in Sydney.

...

.
gots some photos of one of the tour ships operating out of NZ.
Recommended for those interested in a fishing vacation...................... URP!

 

[Mudcat]

.
gots some photos of one of the tour ships operating out of NZ.
Recommended for those interested in a fishing vacation...................... URP!

Looks fun!

 

[I Ratant]

Fact in the make-believe world where the Bible is the sole arbiter of what is real.
I presented my evidence that Jesus could have been a real person, earlier on this thread. I could recap.
The Messiah dies and Herod kills the son, marries the daughter and proclaims himself King of the Jews. The true successor to the messiah (Jesus) lives in obscurity. He is known through family relations to one Joseph of Arimathea who is a world traveler and an acquaintance of one Pontius Pilate. When he (Pilate) arrives in Judea, he is horrified by the lock down of political power that has been created by this High Priesthood. Joseph meets Pilate and a conversation ensues and ends with Joseph recommending a certain man of the order of the high priests who is actually a relation to the former Messiah. Pilate orders this man to be made high Priest. This is allowed to stand for one year before Pilate is persuaded to relent for political reasons and the hegemony of this position reverts back to the dynasty of priests who had been controlling it.
This obscure priest returns to normal life hiding the fact that he is the Messiah, which is a lifelong appointment and the current holders are actually technically ineligible for it but use their wealth to suppress opposition. He eventually meets with the rebel religionists, including his cousin (John the Baptist) who had already given up hope on the entire temple system. This Jesus was reluctant to give up and decided to give it a chance and if he could just gain a footing in the temple he could cause a reformation. Once he made up his mind to take this thing on, his powers of Messiah took hold and they began to be exhibited, just like the ones of his predecessor Messiah.

.
Wow!

 

[Minoosh]

...I should do some searches to see if there is such a thing as a religion with no God ...

I've recently thought Christianity would be a better religion without the resurrection.

It's one thing to get executed knowing you'll return but what if you're a regular guy, afraid, but steadfast?

An obscure Jewish teacher lived simply, gathered a ragtag following and started preaching a message of "love your enemies." This hugely subversive message had to be quashed, because the basis of so much power is having an enemy, an other, a way to keep subjects in fear and united around the status quo. Jesus was just well-known enough to be dangerous. So he had to be killed.

He becomes revered as mankind's "savior" because he rejected the "us vs. them" mind-set that has fostered so many human atrocities. By his perfect example, he becomes, as a model of love triumphant, the basis of a secular, humanistic religion.

It didn't play out that way, but I kind of like it.

 

[Ethnikos]

*snip*
An obscure Jewish teacher lived simply, gathered a ragtag following and started preaching a message of "love your enemies." This hugely subversive message had to be quashed, because the basis of so much power is having an enemy, an other, a way to keep subjects in fear and united around the status quo. Jesus was just well-known enough to be dangerous. So he had to be killed.
*snip*

My scenario to me explains Jesus in that they had something concrete to gab onto and it was not just the message, which no one understood anyway. His followers imagined they would be a sort of royal cabinet of elder advisors or something in a real life physical kingdom. Jesus would have understood that and was as low key as possible. He really didn't want to just be going around doing miracles and was sick of it. A lot of the time he was just trying to get away from people altogether. He had something people wanted and they expected power and wealth. He could have made a claim and could have fought to gain it but had no interest in it, just in having a true form of worship and not the marketing of salvation.

 

[The Norseman]

Fact in the make-believe world where the Bible is the sole arbiter of what is real.
I presented my evidence that Jesus could have been a real person, earlier on this thread. I could recap.
The Messiah dies and Herod kills the son, marries the daughter and proclaims himself King of the Jews. The true successor to the messiah (Jesus) lives in obscurity. He is known through family relations to one Joseph of Arimathea who is a world traveler and an acquaintance of one Pontius Pilate. When he (Pilate) arrives in Judea, he is horrified by the lock down of political power that has been created by this High Priesthood. Joseph meets Pilate and a conversation ensues and ends with Joseph recommending a certain man of the order of the high priests who is actually a relation to the former Messiah. Pilate orders this man to be made high Priest. This is allowed to stand for one year before Pilate is persuaded to relent for political reasons and the hegemony of this position reverts back to the dynasty of priests who had been controlling it.
This obscure priest returns to normal life hiding the fact that he is the Messiah, which is a lifelong appointment and the current holders are actually technically ineligible for it but use their wealth to suppress opposition. He eventually meets with the rebel religionists, including his cousin (John the Baptist) who had already given up hope on the entire temple system. This Jesus was reluctant to give up and decided to give it a chance and if he could just gain a footing in the temple he could cause a reformation. Once he made up his mind to take this thing on, his powers of Messiah took hold and they began to be exhibited, just like the ones of his predecessor Messiah.

I'm not interested in anything the bible has to say about whether or not Jesus existed as a person.

If you've got nothing else, then I'll just move on.

 

[Akhenaten]

My scenario to me explains Jesus in that they had something concrete to gab onto and it was not just the message, which no one understood anyway. His followers imagined they would be a sort of royal cabinet of elder advisors or something in a real life physical kingdom. Jesus would have understood that and was as low key as possible. He really didn't want to just be going around doing miracles and was sick of it. A lot of the time he was just trying to get away from people altogether. He had something people wanted and they expected power and wealth. He could have made a claim and could have fought to gain it but had no interest in it, just in having a true form of worship and not the marketing of salvation.

Shouldn't you be doing a bit more about establishing that this bloke actually existed before you start making all this other stuff up?

 

[Ethnikos]

Shouldn't you be doing a bit more about establishing that this bloke actually existed before you start making all this other stuff up?

That's what I am trying to do, is show how the Jesus story fits, if you understand the politics. Remember what I said in the End of the World thread, the Bible is all about politics. Hardly any real religion in it at all if you understand the gods being in people's heads.

 

[Astrodude]

The best evidence for the existence of Jesus is the strange incoherence of the gospels. There are gaps, inconsistencies, misquotations of the Hebrew Bible, etc. If you were making something like this up, you wouldn't have that as much.

The most likely explanation for the disorganization of the gospels is if the writers based their events, either directly or indirectly, on a person who actually existed. Four or more people aren't going to convene at a secret conference to start a religion out of completely thin air and then have it be incoherent. Also, what about the so called gnostic gospels?

 

[Leumas]

Agreed.

When I was a believer I would read stuff like that and sometimes think to myself, "damn straight, good to be on the lords side." Then sometimes it was like, "WTF"?

Seriously, WTF?

The god of the Bible is not good.

Hey RandFan..... thanks for that video....do you know what movie this is from?

ETA: I found out from the Youtube site....it is God On Trial.

 

[Ethnikos]

I'm not interested in anything the bible has to say about whether or not Jesus existed as a person.

If you've got nothing else, then I'll just move on.

Again, the problem of separating the two topics.
The first line was about the crucifiction story, the rest of the post was about my proof I presented earlier that is out of Josephus, and not much from the Bible.
Herod, the former king of the Jews, the usurper king, the miracles of the former king, the list of all the men who held the office of High priest and when they served. All from the Histories of Josephus.

 

[Akhenaten]

That's what I am trying to do, is show how the Jesus story fits, if you understand the politics. Remember what I said in the End of the World thread, the Bible is all about politics. Hardly any real religion in it at all if you understand the gods being in people's heads.

No I don't remember what you said in some other thread and about the only thing I'm understanding from your posts in this one is that you aren't talking about the same subject as the rest of us.

 

[The Norseman]

Again, the problem of separating the two topics.
The first line was about the crucifiction story, the rest of the post was about my proof I presented earlier that is out of Josephus, and not much from the Bible.
Herod, the former king of the Jews, the usurper king, the miracles of the former king, the list of all the men who held the office of High priest and when they served. All from the Histories of Josephus.

Alright, my mistake. It wasn't clear to me that there was a separation.

 

[Leumas]

That's what I am trying to do, is show how the Jesus story fits, if you understand the politics. Remember what I said in the End of the World thread, the Bible is all about politics. Hardly any real religion in it at all if you understand the gods being in people's heads.

WOW..... Ethnikos.... you are almost out of the tunnel into the light

 

[BobTheDonkey]

The best evidence for the existence of Jesus is the strange incoherence of the gospels. There are gaps, inconsistencies, misquotations of the Hebrew Bible, etc. If you were making something like this up, you wouldn't have that as much.

The most likely explanation for the disorganization of the gospels is if the writers based their events, either directly or indirectly, on a person who actually existed. Four or more people aren't going to convene at a secret conference to start a religion out of completely thin air and then have it be incoherent. Also, what about the so called gnostic gospels?

...or it could be that what's written down is all based on hearsay.

Just like dragons look different in Eastern mythology than in Western. And even different between the different cultures in each of those regions. That doesn't lend any credence to the stories regarding dragons. Likewise, the gaps and disconnects between the gospels don't lend credence to the existence of Jesus. The more likely cause for these discrepancies, however, is that whomever wrote the gospels weren't actually there when the events being relating occurred and that these events never actually occurred and what was written was localized stories.

 

[Leumas]

The best evidence for the existence of Jesus is the strange incoherence of the gospels. There are gaps, inconsistencies, misquotations of the Hebrew Bible, etc. If you were making something like this up, you wouldn't have that as much.

The most likely explanation for the disorganization of the gospels is if the writers based their events, either directly or indirectly, on a person who actually existed. Four or more people aren't going to convene at a secret conference to start a religion out of completely thin air and then have it be incoherent. Also, what about the so called gnostic gospels?

You know that this line of argument has been used by sooooo many HUCKSTERS who were caught in the act?

The Harry Potter movies have so many "gaps, inconsistencies, misquotations of the Wizard's Manual" that we, by the above line of reasoning, must therefore conclude that the Harry Potter Chronicles were based on a Real Harry Potter who although may not have been a real wizard must have been a nice flesh and blood orphan.

 

[Akhenaten]

The best evidence for the existence of Jesus is the strange incoherence of the gospels. There are gaps, inconsistencies, misquotations of the Hebrew Bible, etc. If you were making something like this up, you wouldn't have that as much.

That sounds like something DOC would say.

You might not expect such inconsistencies if one person was making up all four Gospels (unless he was being really tricky and double-guessing us all) but with at least four different authors writing at different times about a lot of stuff that clearly didn't even happen (I mean, come on, Angels??? Fish sammiches for 5,000???) then there will obviously be a few inconsistences.

Everyone knows the best way to keep a story straight is to stick to the truth. That certainly tells me something about the truthiness of the gospels.

The most likely explanation for the disorganization of the gospels is if the writers based their events, either directly or indirectly, on a person who actually existed.

Because four people telling the same true story would never write down the same things.


No, wait . . . what???

Four or more people aren't going to convene at a secret conference to start a religion out of completely thin air and then have it be incoherent.

You've never looked into Scientology, have you?

Also, what about the so called gnostic gospels?

What about them?

 

[RandFan]

The best evidence for the existence of Jesus is the strange incoherence of the gospels. There are gaps, inconsistencies, misquotations of the Hebrew Bible, etc. If you were making something like this up, you wouldn't have that as much.

The most likely explanation for the disorganization of the gospels is if the writers based their events, either directly or indirectly, on a person who actually existed. Four or more people aren't going to convene at a secret conference to start a religion out of completely thin air and then have it be incoherent.

Straw man. Christianity is a giant game of telephone. Where oral traditions circulate for decades, bifurcates, recombines, finally written dow, translated, translated again, edited, originals and copies lost...

At one time a scholarly attempt to get to the source material was attempted. 10,000 copies were relied on. (Misquoting Jesus --Ehrman).

No, there is a far more likely scenario, legend, myth, human error and ego.

Also, what about the so called gnostic gospels?

... and the many other apochraphyl texts. Not good for the idea that there is any coherency thats for sure.