7 of 12
7
Blog: Is Jesus a Myth?
Posted: 27 April 2011 09:50 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 91 ]  
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  3255
Joined  2004-12-24
pabloj - 27 April 2011 01:47 PM
SkepticX - 27 April 2011 10:33 AM

The reason to believe is personal experience.

That’s right ...

Bruce wrote that, not me.

I said it’s bullshit.

 Signature 

“We say, ‘Love your brother…’ We don’t say it really, but… Well we don’t literally say it. We don’t really, literally mean it. No, we don’t believe it either, but… But that message should be clear.”—David St. Hubbins

Profile
 
 
Posted: 27 April 2011 10:34 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 92 ]  
Administrator
Avatar
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2922
Joined  2006-06-15
pabloj - 27 April 2011 01:47 PM

So back to the original topic of Jesus being a myth. I don’t think so, because he has a strength and power that some contrived figure couldn’t have.

(Andrew):  Why can’t you contrive a character full of strength and power? You’ll have to come up with a better reason to reject the myth position.  Jesus—if he existed—is only alleged by others to have had strength and power.  Like Gandalf.

pabloj - 27 April 2011 01:47 PM

In another thread someone is comparing Harry Potter to Jesus. I really don’t think I could have gone to a Harry Potter convention and had a “personal experience”. But maybe people do, but they’re probably a little ‘fruity’ too.

(Andrew):  “Fruity”?  What’s that mean?  Are all people who have an intense spiritual experience “fruity”?

 Signature 

“Another flaw in the human character is that everybody wants to build and nobody wants to do maintenance.”—Kurt Vonnegut

Profile
 
 
Posted: 27 April 2011 10:45 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 93 ]  
Sr. Member
Avatar
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  3255
Joined  2004-12-24
pabloj - 27 April 2011 01:47 PM
SkepticX - 27 April 2011 10:33 AM

The reason to believe is personal experience.

That’s right. My personal experience in a nutshell is that I was going through a very hard time in my life, the hardest ever, close to death. I went to church and had a “personal experience”.  But that’s not the end of the story because then you find out about all the corruption going on in the Christian church. Corruption going up to the sky.

So back to the original topic of Jesus being a myth. I don’t think so, because he has a strength and power that some contrived figure couldn’t have.

In another thread someone is comparing Harry Potter to Jesus. I really don’t think I could have gone to a Harry Potter convention and had a “personal experience”. But maybe people do, but they’re probably a little ‘fruity’ too.


I find those objections highly specious, and most likely disingenuous ... at the very least they’re extremely shy of being anywhere near reasonably well considered. Neither point bears any real scrutiny at all.

The first comment (strength and power) is probably one of the most blatant examples of begging the question I’ve seen—you simply can’t get much more obvious about it—and the second (“fruity” personal experience) is quite egocentric and presumptuous. It completely ignores other potential sources for The Experience (community, for example) and a-priori limits The Experience to religious foundations. It’s another obvious manifestation of begging the question, but at least it’s removed from absolute blatancy by a step (the question begging is in the unspoken premises rather than the entirety of the argument).

 Signature 

“We say, ‘Love your brother…’ We don’t say it really, but… Well we don’t literally say it. We don’t really, literally mean it. No, we don’t believe it either, but… But that message should be clear.”—David St. Hubbins

Profile
 
 
Posted: 27 April 2011 11:36 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 94 ]  
Administrator
Avatar
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  492
Joined  2005-02-22

The problem with inner experiences is how we make a sensible (to ourselves) narrative out of them later.


History can suffer the same malfunction over and over again.


If the Tale of Jesus were a total fabrication, it would have been a better one, and it would not have been predicated on something that would have been necessary to have really taken place for the story to be true. The resurrection was only possible because Jesus was allowed to be removed from the cross shortly after being put on it. I say shortly compared to most of the thousands of people who were also crucified back then. Otherwise, Magic Lad would have to do it right there on the cross in front of everybody and I’m sure Rome would remember that.


Why do magicians do their work behind a sheet? Because they are liars.

 Signature 

Delude responsibly.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 27 April 2011 12:14 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 95 ]  
Newbie
Rank
Total Posts:  7
Joined  2011-04-24
Andrew - 27 April 2011 02:34 PM
pabloj - 27 April 2011 01:47 PM

(Andrew):  Why can’t you contrive a character full of strength and power? You’ll have to come up with a better reason to reject the myth position.  Jesus—if he existed—is only alleged by others to have had strength and power.  Like Gandalf.

pabloj - 27 April 2011 01:47 PM

(Andrew):  “Fruity”?  What’s that mean?  Are all people who have an intense spiritual experience “fruity”?

I don’t mean strength and power like being able to lift a car over his head. I mean strength and power as in INFLUENCE.

Also, I meant a person MIGHT be “fruity” having an intense spiritual experience over a POP CULTURE character like Harry Potter.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 27 April 2011 12:48 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 96 ]  
Newbie
Rank
Total Posts:  7
Joined  2011-04-24
SkepticX - 27 April 2011 02:45 PM

I find those objections highly specious, and most likely disingenuous ... at the very least they’re extremely shy of being anywhere near reasonably well considered. Neither point bears any real scrutiny at all.

The first comment (strength and power) is probably one of the most blatant examples of begging the question I’ve seen—you simply can’t get much more obvious about it—and the second (“fruity” personal experience) is quite egocentric and presumptuous.

Strength and power just meant the amount of influence he has on earth, which no other single figure has. There might be a billion or two billion people representing Christ in some way. I’m not saying whether that influence is right or wrong; ITS JUST THERE.

And yeah I MIGHT just wonder about the mental stability of a guy having a religious experience over Harry Potter.

[ Edited: 27 April 2011 01:00 PM by pabloj]
Profile
 
 
Posted: 27 April 2011 04:53 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 97 ]  
Administrator
Avatar
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2922
Joined  2006-06-15
pabloj - 27 April 2011 04:14 PM

I don’t mean strength and power like being able to lift a car over his head. I mean strength and power as in INFLUENCE.

(Andrew):  Oh…like the Marlboro Man?  Or Uncle Tom? 

pabloj - 27 April 2011 04:14 PM

Also, I meant a person MIGHT be “fruity” having an intense spiritual experience over a POP CULTURE character like Harry Potter.

(Andrew):  What do you mean by “fruity”?  That’s a gross anti-gay slur, you know.  Do you mean to denigrate those who experience something profound reading about a fictional character, by equating them with homosexuals?
I’d like you to define your term, then we can proceed.

 Signature 

“Another flaw in the human character is that everybody wants to build and nobody wants to do maintenance.”—Kurt Vonnegut

Profile
 
 
Posted: 27 April 2011 05:27 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 98 ]  
Sr. Member
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  3765
Joined  2007-03-11
Andrew - 27 April 2011 08:53 PM
pabloj - 27 April 2011 04:14 PM

Also, I meant a person MIGHT be “fruity” having an intense spiritual experience over a POP CULTURE character like Harry Potter.

(Andrew):  What do you mean by “fruity”?  That’s a gross anti-gay slur, you know.  Do you mean to denigrate those who experience something profound reading about a fictional character, by equating them with homosexuals?
I’d like you to define your term, then we can proceed.

I don’t think he meant it as a gay slur, as in some parts of the country it has nothing to do with sexual orientation.  It’s more like “nuttier than a fruitcake”, if you have that expression in Maine.  But he can speak for himself.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 27 April 2011 05:44 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 99 ]  
Administrator
Avatar
RankRankRankRank
Total Posts:  2922
Joined  2006-06-15
Ecurb Noselrub - 27 April 2011 09:27 PM

I don’t think he meant it as a gay slur, as in some parts of the country it has nothing to do with sexual orientation.  It’s more like “nuttier than a fruitcake”, if you have that expression in Maine.  But he can speak for himself.

(Andrew):  I don’t know…“fruit” and “fag” are pretty much synonymous.  A straight woman who prefers the company of gay men over straight men is known universally as a “fruit fly”, for instance (among other terms).  But as you say…I’m sure pabloj will clarify.

 Signature 

“Another flaw in the human character is that everybody wants to build and nobody wants to do maintenance.”—Kurt Vonnegut

Profile
 
 
Posted: 27 April 2011 08:47 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 100 ]  
Newbie
Rank
Total Posts:  7
Joined  2011-04-24

Yes, I meant ‘fruity’ meaning mentally unstable or strange. I was not talking about sexual issues.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 13 May 2011 09:33 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 101 ]  
Newbie
Rank
Total Posts:  12
Joined  2011-04-03

Jesus of the New Testament is definitely a myth.  A myth that may have originated from a factual character that lived and preached his own version of Judaism like many other small cult leaders of the day.  I would not be surprised to find that this cultist leader of flesh, blood and bone was convicted of blasphemy and crucified as a typical punishment to blasphemers. 

When this false prophet failed to achieve what his followers had anticipated they embellished the story in a typical oral tradition.  The stories that emerged as time went on got intertwined to well known myths of the day.  The raising the dead, healing the blind and lame, casting out devils etc, etc, etc Soon these exaggerated oral stories were written down and as time moved on again, were copied and copied and copied.  In fact we know that the earliest manuscripts of the New Testaments are not the originals but in fact copies of copies.  And these earliest copies we have were changed by the early church leaders.  For example, the best known Jesus story is found in every known Jesus film to date.  The one where Jesus saves an adulteress from being stoned to death and the angry mob.  This is the one that Jesus says (and I’m paraphrasing here) ‘He who is without sin cast the first stone’ thus the crowd disperses and leaves the woman alone.  This story cannot be found in the earliest copy we have of the Gospel of John or any other earliest copy of any other Gospel. 

Another example is from the Resurrection story.  In the oldest manuscript of Mark we have tells us about the account when women go to the tomb where Jesus was laid and they discover the empty tomb.  However they meet a stranger who tells them that Jesus is no longer in the tomb and instructs them to tell Jesus’ disciples that he will meet them in Galilee.  The women flee and never pass this information on to anyone, including the disciples.  The story ends here but someone decides to change the text in later copies of the Gospel of Mark to the point where the women do go to the disciples and tell them of the empty tomb and the stranger.  In fact this religious scribe added a further twelve verses.  These added verses tell the disciples to make new converts, that people be baptised in His name, and that these people who become baptised will speak in tongues, will be able to handle snakes, drink poison and that poison will not harm them.  These changes are deliberate whilst there are some that look like they are accidental. In fact another change of the New Testament is when Jesus heals a leper who had beseeched him in the earliest manuscript that we have it states that Jesus became angry at this man daring to ask him for a cure to his illness.  This was changed to a loving and compassionate Jesus who healed the man out of pure love.  Why would Christian leaders (scribes) change the Gospels in these ways…Where they trying to build up a myth? If Jesus was the son of God and divine then we as pure mortals have NO RIGHT to change His history or his words.  Unless of course he was just a man without supernatural abilities…a man not born of a virgin…not the son of God, but in fact a false prophet!
These are just a few examples of the Jesus myth.

Whether Jesus’ as a man existed or not, we can be certain that the supernatural Jesus did not exist.  But what is utterly silly is how many grown men and women will deny at all costs that their Jesus was a charlatan simply because they are too emotionally depended on him.  But this is irrational, delusional, dangerous and unhealthy for the body politic as a whole.  These delusional people would deny that Elvis Presley never existed if they thought it would reinforce their God delusions.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 21 June 2011 06:03 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 102 ]  
Newbie
Rank
Total Posts:  20
Joined  2011-02-07

Contrary to the mythicist’s view of a mythological origins we find a movement from human to legendary. The intentional re-workings of the Gospels by their authors are responses to historical events. The mythological elements are the later work of Paul and those that influenced him attached to the legendary aspects that are reflected in the Gospels. While the Gospels are later in writing than the authentic Pauline Epistles, they have a closer geographic and ethnic origin to Jesus and his followers than Paul and the Hellenistic mythological language.


The discrepancies in the Gospels can be analyzed for motivation by the authors. For example John changed the time of the crucifixion reflected in Matthew so that Jesus’s death in his Gospel would coincide with the slaughter of the lambs. This in turn builds the theological theme that Jesus is the Passover Lamb and proposing that Jesus is a sacrifice for sin. These dependencies are often minor but are cumulative and add up to significance.


Looking at the various re-workings of Mark by Matthew and Luke shows that they had an agenda to overcome; the idea that Jesus was a disciple of John the Baptist, to create an apology for why he would have been baptized for the remission of sin, and to subordinate the Baptist to Jesus as a precursor. Matthew drops the statement from Mark that John’s baptism was for the remission of sin. Again we see the human Jesus of Mark elevated in the later gospels’ re-workings.


Looking at the way Matthew handles various texts one can see the elimination of normal human behavior from Mark’s presentation to a more supernatural figure. Mark’s “Why do you call Me good? There is none good but God.” is reworked to “Why do you ask me about the good?” For now with the addition of the virgin birth Matthew presents Jesus with supernatural powers and born with the Holy Spirit. He knows the thoughts of others unlike in Mark 5:21ff, when he questions, “Who touched my garment?” Like God in Matthew, Jesus is now good. The Gospel of John will make Jesus the very incarnation of God’s reason as Logos, the Word.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 25 June 2011 09:29 AM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 103 ]  
Member
Avatar
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  802
Joined  2010-11-12
Mephistophelean - 13 May 2011 01:33 PM

Jesus of the New Testament is definitely a myth.  A myth that may have originated from a factual character that lived and preached his own version of Judaism like many other small cult leaders of the day.  I would not be surprised to find that this cultist leader of flesh, blood and bone was convicted of blasphemy and crucified as a typical punishment to blasphemers. 

When this false prophet failed to achieve what his followers had anticipated they embellished the story in a typical oral tradition.  The stories that emerged as time went on got intertwined to well known myths of the day.  The raising the dead, healing the blind and lame, casting out devils etc, etc, etc Soon these exaggerated oral stories were written down and as time moved on again, were copied and copied and copied.  In fact we know that the earliest manuscripts of the New Testaments are not the originals but in fact copies of copies.  And these earliest copies we have were changed by the early church leaders.  For example, the best known Jesus story is found in every known Jesus film to date.  The one where Jesus saves an adulteress from being stoned to death and the angry mob.  This is the one that Jesus says (and I’m paraphrasing here) ‘He who is without sin cast the first stone’ thus the crowd disperses and leaves the woman alone.  This story cannot be found in the earliest copy we have of the Gospel of John or any other earliest copy of any other Gospel. 

Another example is from the Resurrection story.  In the oldest manuscript of Mark we have tells us about the account when women go to the tomb where Jesus was laid and they discover the empty tomb.  However they meet a stranger who tells them that Jesus is no longer in the tomb and instructs them to tell Jesus’ disciples that he will meet them in Galilee.  The women flee and never pass this information on to anyone, including the disciples.  The story ends here but someone decides to change the text in later copies of the Gospel of Mark to the point where the women do go to the disciples and tell them of the empty tomb and the stranger.  In fact this religious scribe added a further twelve verses.  These added verses tell the disciples to make new converts, that people be baptised in His name, and that these people who become baptised will speak in tongues, will be able to handle snakes, drink poison and that poison will not harm them.  These changes are deliberate whilst there are some that look like they are accidental. In fact another change of the New Testament is when Jesus heals a leper who had beseeched him in the earliest manuscript that we have it states that Jesus became angry at this man daring to ask him for a cure to his illness.  This was changed to a loving and compassionate Jesus who healed the man out of pure love.  Why would Christian leaders (scribes) change the Gospels in these ways…Where they trying to build up a myth? If Jesus was the son of God and divine then we as pure mortals have NO RIGHT to change His history or his words.  Unless of course he was just a man without supernatural abilities…a man not born of a virgin…not the son of God, but in fact a false prophet!
These are just a few examples of the Jesus myth.

Whether Jesus’ as a man existed or not, we can be certain that the supernatural Jesus did not exist.  But what is utterly silly is how many grown men and women will deny at all costs that their Jesus was a charlatan simply because they are too emotionally depended on him.  But this is irrational, delusional, dangerous and unhealthy for the body politic as a whole.  These delusional people would deny that Elvis Presley never existed if they thought it would reinforce their God delusions.

 

The attempt to analyze the intricacies of a belief system that is beyond false will lead only to more confusion.
Best to dismiss all fairy tales as delusional and get on with life.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 25 June 2011 06:41 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 104 ]  
Newbie
Rank
Total Posts:  20
Joined  2011-02-07
toombaru - 25 June 2011 01:29 PM
Mephistophelean - 13 May 2011 01:33 PM

 

The attempt to analyze the intricacies of a belief system that is beyond false will lead only to more confusion.
Best to dismiss all fairy tales as delusional and get on with life.

Actually those of us from a historical critical background have much success in de-constructing Christian belief systems and freeing its believers from delusion.

Profile
 
 
Posted: 25 June 2011 10:26 PM   [ Ignore ]   [ # 105 ]  
Member
Avatar
RankRankRank
Total Posts:  802
Joined  2010-11-12
TGBaker - 25 June 2011 10:41 PM
toombaru - 25 June 2011 01:29 PM
Mephistophelean - 13 May 2011 01:33 PM

 

The attempt to analyze the intricacies of a belief system that is beyond false will lead only to more confusion.
Best to dismiss all fairy tales as delusional and get on with life.

Actually those of us from a historical critical background have much success in de-constructing Christian belief systems and freeing its believers from delusion.

I hope you believe in reincarnation.
There are 2200 million Christians in the world and 1650 million Moslems.
You have a daunting task.

Profile
 
 
   
7 of 12
7
 
‹‹ Passion of the atheist      Chew-toy alert ››
RSS 2.0     Atom Feed