Your thoughts on Jesus
 

I have been an atheist for several years but have had problems knowing what to make of the Jesus character everybody seems to like. I am wondering what others of the same ilk think about him and how most of the Western world belives he is the son of god

Re: Your thoughts on Jesus
 

[ QUOTE ]
I have been an atheist for several years but have had problems knowing what to make of the Jesus character everybody seems to like. I am wondering what others of the same ilk think about him and how most of the Western world belives he is the son of god

[/ QUOTE ]
It's important to realize that there is often a disconnect between the Jesus of the Gospels, the "historical" Jesus, and the Jesus of "Jesus is Love" (i.e. the soft Christianity held by so many nice non-fundamental Christians).

I guess you could say:

Jesus is what you want him to be.

Therein lies his appeal.

Re: Your thoughts on Jesus
 

All I know is the man had dead sexy abs! [img]/images/graemlins/wink.gif[/img]

Re: Your thoughts on Jesus
 

I think that to believers, Jesus is the projection of all the good things in their life. Their family and loved ones and all the things that they hold dear to their heart. This is why they defend and get so insulted when you question their faith in Jesus because it is so much a part of them that it is almost indistinguishable to them. They end up so that they cannot picture life without Jesus, so you hear things like "No faith in Jesus, you must hate yourself" or "Why don't atheists just kill themselves". They have their life so entwined with their faith in Jesus that life without Jesus just seems meaningless and devoid of morality or responsibilty. This leads to the "Without God, murder is ok" crowd who view atheism as this purely hedonistic lifestyle that is comparable with being criminally insane. (IMO, Atheism is not actually a lifestyle, for the record.)

Re: Your thoughts on Jesus
 

I question whether he ever existed. I know that sounds insane in a culture built on the certainty that he did (and Christmas movies presented as fact), but the more you actually look at what historians and Catholic apologists write about the issue, the more you realise the evidence is very scant. Without the bible, there would not be enough evidence for a historian to consider him a real historical character.

As the only evidence, the new testament comes under scrutiny. The first parts of what would become the New Testament were written around 40 years (the absolute minimum according to even religious scholars) after his death. Later parts were added up to 100 years after his death. In a time of myth and superstition, without widespread education/writing, TV, or reliable press, such a story could very well be a complete fabrication. Certainly there were excellent reasons for religious powers to write a story which combined the prominent pagan myths of the day (as the bible suspiciuosly does).

Anyway, the point is that even if he did exist, we can't reliably say anything at all about him or his life, as none other than the religious powers of the day wrote anything historical about him.

Re: Your thoughts on Jesus
 

I've been reading a bit about this recently and tend to agree. The possibility that he didn't exist at all is a real one.

I tend to think on balance he probably did, just an instinct based on human tendency and the oral tradition, there was probably something at the genesis of those tales. I don't think we can go much further than that though, with the records available it's hard to know much of anything about him.

Re: Your thoughts on Jesus
 

"As the only evidence, the new testament comes under scrutiny."

The New Testament has more ancient manuscript evidence than any other work in history. It is also remarkably close from translation to translation- see your goofy comment below.

"In a time of myth and superstition, without widespread education/writing, TV, or reliable press, such a story could very well be a complete fabrication."

This is wrong for the very reasons you state.

Re: Your thoughts on Jesus
 

http://img413.imageshack.us/img413/2857/j2k557sp.jpg

Re: Your thoughts on Jesus
 

People were being eaten by lions rather than simply renouncing Jesus in the decades following His crucifixion. That being so close to the "genesis" of the story lends some serious credibility to the simple matter of His existence.

Mind you, it only took a couple hundred years for THE Roman Emporer to declare Christianity the religion of Rome. That would be comparable to George Washington being fabricated, and the American Independence occuring by coincidental happenstance. As in, not very likely.

Re: Your thoughts on Jesus
 

OK.

I was beginning to think you were a bit off, and now I find your Mr OOO I'm confused but still leaning towards a bit off.

Re: Your thoughts on Jesus
 

Wasn't he a terrorist? I thought he was executed for inciting riots and vandalising temples?

A charismatic cult leader can create a mob following on the flisiest of premises.

Jesus had followers, Koresh had followers, Bin Laden has followers. All in the same boat in my book.

(Note. expected response from Xstians, "yeah but we're perfectly reasonable, Bin Laden and his lot are crackers". See the irony. They think the same about you)

Re: Your thoughts on Jesus
 

Wasn't he a terrorist?

According to Venezuela's Hugo Chavez, "Jesus was the first socialist." Oddly enough, that's probably the only point on which Mr. Chavez and I agree. [img]/images/graemlins/cool.gif[/img]

Re: Your thoughts on Jesus
 

Oh, I'm sorry - you wanted a serious response.

[ QUOTE ]
The New Testament has more ancient manuscript evidence than any other work in history. It is also remarkably close from translation to translation- see your goofy comment below.

[/ QUOTE ]

Yes, that's because they're all copied from original works, the first one written a generation after Jesus died.

Simple question - who wrote the various books of the NT? When?

Second simple question - is there a non biblical account of the life of Jesus? Who wrote it?

Third simple question - why did none of the Jewish or Roman historians of the day (many of whom have surviving works) document a man who performed amazing miracles witnessed by hundreds, caused civil unrest, and went on to have a major religious following after his death?

Re: Your thoughts on Jesus
 

Yea Jesus and David Koresh 2 peas in a pod.

Now you're just being ridiculous.

EDIT- add Bin Laden and make it 3 peas-stillridiculous.

Re: Your thoughts on Jesus
 

[ QUOTE ]
I have been an atheist for several years but have had problems knowing what to make of the Jesus character everybody seems to like.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's not relevant whether he existed. The street corner near the Art Gallery has a guy claiming to be the son of god and preaching redemption. If jesus was a real person, there's no reason to think any of the claims he made or that are made about him now are true.

Once a minor personality cult catches on it's hard for followers to accept that at the time the person was not even a footnote. In any case, what would it matter if he existed or not, since it can never be disproved.

If he was real, he seems likely to be a disturbed new-ager (considering the context of the times).

luckyme

Re: Your thoughts on Jesus
 

[ QUOTE ]
I question whether he ever existed. I know that sounds insane in a culture built on the certainty that he did (and Christmas movies presented as fact), but the more you actually look at what historians and Catholic apologists write about the issue, the more you realise the evidence is very scant. Without the bible, there would not be enough evidence for a historian to consider him a real historical character.

As the only evidence, the new testament comes under scrutiny. The first parts of what would become the New Testament were written around 40 years (the absolute minimum according to even religious scholars) after his death. Later parts were added up to 100 years after his death. In a time of myth and superstition, without widespread education/writing, TV, or reliable press, such a story could very well be a complete fabrication. Certainly there were excellent reasons for religious powers to write a story which combined the prominent pagan myths of the day (as the bible suspiciuosly does).

Anyway, the point is that even if he did exist, we can't reliably say anything at all about him or his life, as none other than the religious powers of the day wrote anything historical about him.

[/ QUOTE ]

Surprisingly Phil, I must say well written.

Re: Your thoughts on Jesus
 

[ QUOTE ]
Simple question - who wrote the various books of the NT? When?

[/ QUOTE ]

From what I understand, you are correct on the timing.

The 4 Gospels are named for their authors. Paul wrote most of the other NT books, his "letters"...John is generally regarded to have written Revelation...that covers most of them, don't feel like researching the rest right now.

[ QUOTE ]
Second simple question - is there a non biblical account of the life of Jesus? Who wrote it?

[/ QUOTE ]

A secular historian of that time named Josephus wrote about the life of Jesus and even mentioned his resurrection. Can't remember the title of the collection of his works, something like "The Writings of Josephus." This text is easy to come by...I know a couple people who have one. It's also important to note that the passages about Jesus are contained within a much, MUCH larger secular text...he wasn't the focus by a long shot.

Re: Your thoughts on Jesus
 

Jesus just had a purified ego, which is to say his ego was transcended. When the ego is transcended, the consciousness can be seen for what it is, which is pure empty-awareness. Everyone has a pure consciousness which is the same thing as saying everyone is a child of God. Religions are just like different ways of purifying the ego. The way one purfies the ego doesn't matter, it's just the transcendence of the ego that is important. When the limitations of the ego are trascended, the person sees from a vaster point of view. The increase in vastness is really just more of a connection to that which they already are, which is their pure conscious-awareness. So it's not completely right to say the connection is more so developed because everybody at all times is this basic infinite pure awareness, it's just that the resistance to this basic emptiness is greater in some than in others. Which is to say people have varying degrees of ego-imprisonment.

Jesus as son of God could be called a Christian view, but Jesus is no more a son of God than the Uni-bomber. There are obviously gross distinctions between them in obvious ways but they are the same in that they both have a basic essence to them, which is nothing, that they both are/were/am. They both had an 'Amness' nature about them which is the same amness that is timeless, infinite, pure, and perfect insofar as we can describe the qualities of perfection. Sounds crazy but that's the truth IMO.

Re: Your thoughts on Jesus
 

This seems like a very Buddhist interpretation. Am I right?

Re: Your thoughts on Jesus
 

Jesus was real....real mean.

And Jesus spoke:

Luke 19:27 But those mine enemies, which would not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me.

Re: Your thoughts on Jesus
 

[ QUOTE ]
The 4 Gospels are named for their authors.

[/ QUOTE ]
No, the four gospels were given names based on guesses of the the second century church. Before around 180 AD every document claiming to quote some teaching of Jesus never claims to quote from the gospel of ____. Around 180 AD a man names Irenaeus writes "Against Heresies" and includes references to named gospels. After this date it suddenly becomes common to quote from the gospel of _____.

[ QUOTE ]
Paul wrote most of the other NT books, his "letters"

[/ QUOTE ]
Actually, the only letters that were traditionally attributed to Paul that are still generally accepted by scholars to be his work are:

Rom, Cor I and II, Gal, Philippians, Thes I, and Philemon.

Note: these letters are the ONLY books in the NT whose traditional authors stand up to modern scrutiny.

[ QUOTE ]
...John is generally regarded to have written Revelation

[/ QUOTE ]

Someone named John wrote Revelation (the text is one of the few books that actually names it's author) but nothing in it suggests that it is the same John as is traditionally granted authorship of the Gospel of John (John the son of Zebedee) and modern research has generally concluded that he didn't write that either.

[ QUOTE ]
SA secular historian of that time named Josephus wrote about the life of Jesus and even mentioned his resurrection. Can't remember the title of the collection of his works, something like "The Writings of Josephus." This text is easy to come by...I know a couple people who have one. It's also important to note that the passages about Jesus are contained within a much, MUCH larger secular text...he wasn't the focus by a long shot.

[/ QUOTE ]
Here's the famous quote:

[ QUOTE ]
At this time there appeared Jesus, a wise man, if indeed one should call him a man. For he was a doer of startling deeds, a teacher of the people who receive the truth with pleasure. And he gained a following both among many Jews and among many of Greek origin. He was the Messiah. And when Pilate, because of an accusation made by the leading men among us, condemned him to the cross, those who had loved him previously did not cease to do so. For he appeared to them on the third day, living again, just as the divine prophets had spoken of these and countless other wondrous things about him. And up until this very day the tribe of Christians, named after him, has not died out.

[/ QUOTE ]

Remember, Josephus was not a Christian but a Jew. However, the style is that of a devoted Christian. For this reason this is a very controvertial quote. The copies we have today are not originals but opies made over the centuries - mostly by Christian monks. Some believe it was all inserted wholesale by a transcribing monk in the 3rd century (or so), others claim it was embellished. Very few serious scholars take this quote at face value (basically, only committed fundamentalists do). It is also important to note that this quote only became common in Christian writings after 300 AD. Before then early church fathers wrote of their anguish that no independent accounts of Jesus existed, even though Josephus' work was readily available to them.

It is also the only non-biblical contemporary reference to Jesus. There aren't even any references to lost references. This is it.

Re: Your thoughts on Jesus
 

you seem like a smart guy, but do you really believe the sh*t you just said?? if so, then why do you believe it? it sounds ridiculous. i am continually amazed at how so many intelligent people can believe such silly and foolish ideas in every arena of life.

Re: Your thoughts on Jesus
 

What do you mean by 'not even a footnote'. How can you compare a lunatic on a street corner (who has no followers) with Jesus, who perhaps has more 'followers' than anyone in the history of the world? And how is it irrelevant? If his claims are true, then He is more relevant than anything in the universe.

Re: Your thoughts on Jesus
 

[ QUOTE ]
If his claims are true, then He is more relevant than anything in the universe.

[/ QUOTE ]

This is also true of the guy on the street corner. He is less likely to get followers now. just like poltogeist fans say cameras cause electrical interference that puts of poltegeists, funny that [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

Re: Your thoughts on Jesus
 

[ QUOTE ]
How can you compare a lunatic on a street corner (who has no followers) with Jesus, who perhaps has more 'followers' than anyone in the history of the world?

[/ QUOTE ]

What would the number of followers have to do with the veracity of claims? That's the "the earth is flat because we all believe it" argument. If jesus was 'true' but he had no followers, would that make him 'untrue'. He had very few followers in 50AD, were his claims only 500/2000000 as true then as now? You won't be able to realize this, but to a non-believer there really is no discernible difference. The fact that one 'caught on', as have other past and current claimants, adds or subtracts nothing from the veracity or similarity of their claims.

[ QUOTE ]
What do you mean by 'not even a footnote'.

[/ QUOTE ]

A fevered follower of any personality cult finds it inconceivable that such an obviously important person may well have been perceived as just another new-ager activist, and have gone virtually not noted in their time. As it refers to jesus - Brutus attracted much more attention in his time, yet has nothing remotely near the influence of jesus today. If we were living while they were, Brutus would be seen as the important figure both immediately and by historians of that time.

luckyme

Re: Your thoughts on Jesus
 

[ QUOTE ]
you seem like a smart guy, but do you really believe the sh*t you just said?? if so, then why do you believe it? it sounds ridiculous. i am continually amazed at how so many intelligent people can believe such silly and foolish ideas in every arena of life.

[/ QUOTE ]

Do you believe there are higher stages of consciousness? When you compare a 2-year-old having a temper-tantrum, with a college graduate at graduation realizing something deeper about the whole education process and life in general, and then with, say a zen master realizing something total about existence in general, then what is the difference between the three? Is is merely greater intellectualisms? Is a Zen master just better-abled to rationalize things than the 2-year-old, or is there some deeper realization, something that transcends the thought process in general that leads to the difference? Philosophy is good but if you think you are only your thoughts then you are neglecting the thing from which your thoughts come from, which is the basic awareness that everybody intrinsically is, that can't be qualified, that can only be rested in, and from which everything manifests . . . thoughts, emotions, everything contained in this basic awareness. So the consciousness of a two-year-old could be seen as ego-centric, the college-grad could be called ethno or world-centric maybe, and the conciousness of a zen master could be called Universe or cosmic-centric. To see that doesn't require faith, it's direct realization of that which you already are. Yeah these ideas may sound silly, but there ya go, there's a rational way to look at something that can't be qualified in conceptual terms.

Re: Your thoughts on Jesus
 

I don't know enough about Buddhism to say it's a Buddhist interpretation. I think it echoes what Zen practicioners would say but they would probably say their interpretation isn't Zen or Buddhism or anything, it's just what is. Google Ken Wilber?

Re: Your thoughts on Jesus
 

Jesus is the best bestfreind anyone could have, Hands Down!

Re: Your thoughts on Jesus
 

[ QUOTE ]
However, the style is that of a devoted Christian. For this reason this is a very controvertial quote.

[/ QUOTE ]

And if not for that reason than another.

Re: Your thoughts on Jesus
 

[ QUOTE ]
I have been an atheist for several years but have had problems knowing what to make of the Jesus character everybody seems to like. I am wondering what others of the same ilk think about him and how most of the Western world belives he is the son of god

[/ QUOTE ]

Q. Whats Jesus's least favorite candy?

A. M&Ms. Cause they fall through the holes in his hands.

peace

john nickle

Re: Your thoughts on Jesus
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
However, the style is that of a devoted Christian. For this reason this is a very controvertial quote.

[/ QUOTE ]

And if not for that reason than another.

[/ QUOTE ]
You seem to be implying that those who doubt the legitimacy of this quote are just being argumentative. It's not just a handful of cantankerous atheists who agrue that this text has been compromised. Christians have been arguing about it for over 300 years (i.e. ever since it became possible to argue about these issues in the western world without getting burned at the stake just for speaking up).

Re: Your thoughts on Jesus
 

[ QUOTE ]
As it refers to jesus - Brutus attracted much more attention in his time, yet has nothing remotely near the influence of jesus today.

[/ QUOTE ]
Better yet, John the Baptist attracted far more attention than Jesus did.

Re: Your thoughts on Jesus
 

I think it's interesting that you want to hear about Jesus from people 'of the same ilk' as you. You are choosing the answers you want to hear and limiting whatyou hear.
If you want to learn about the space shuttle would you ask the milkman.
Jesus character was what was so appealing, he drew crowds everywhere he went. He showed grace and mercy to the undeserving.
And well.. the reason why he is so popular today is because he is still very much alive and well and encounters those who seek Him.
It's the experience of encountering this Living God that transforms people, not just a purifying of one's ego...

Why would an intelligent person want to live for this Jesus fellow that people seem to like? Cause what he says rings true when you do what He says.
I have no problem at all expressing my need for this dude, I am totally dependant on what He does. This is what makes me strong, not weak.
There's lots of other reasons though, the work of the Holy Spirit, miracles, answered prayer, realised prophecy.

Re: Your thoughts on Jesus
 

Well, I never met him.. I did seek him in my youth.. he didn't reply.

Don't tell me that I didn't seek the right way, because if that is so, you can find whatever you want or imagine.

He just wasn't there for me. [img]/images/graemlins/smile.gif[/img]

Re: Your thoughts on Jesus
 

I don't know what you prayed, said, did to seek Him.
This is what it took me.
"Jesus if you are who you said you are then I want to know you"
I believe that all it takes is a surrender. From then God has been with me, it hasn't been happy and smiley faces all the time but my life has been living.

Re: Your thoughts on Jesus
 

[ QUOTE ]
and the conciousness of a zen master could be called Universe or cosmic-centric.

[/ QUOTE ]

The 'one-with-the-universe' experience the Zen master has can be acheived via a stroke or other interference with the brain module that helps us identify 'me' from 'out there'. Zen experiences are usually acheived by blood flow regulation. Having an experience, this or other%2