Chaupoline

Yeshua of Nazareth amassed a following of Jews in Palestine. How large the following is not important. The Jewish elite attempted to destroy the movement and Ponitius Pilate had the new cult leader crucified attempting to destroy his religious group. Crucifiction is an exection intended to publicly humiliate and destroy any following the person may have amassed. They wanted to make an example of him. I don't care if the man came back to life. I am amazed that the movement was reborn after his crucifiction. His disciples scattered and Christianity should have died with Yeshua. I think that the resurrection of Christ is a metaphor for his philosophy's rise from the dead so to speak. It is miraculous that Chrisitanity ever became a major world religion.

Mageth

Well, it (the particular sect of Christianity that triumphed and evolved into the Christianity we know today) becoming the official state religion of the Roman Empire, after which it set out on a pogrom against other religions, sects, and "heresies", which pretty much assured it becoming the dominant religion in Europe and parts of Western Asia, certainly had something to do with Christianity becoming a major world religion.

Becoming a major world religion is easier if the religion is not adverse to wiping out the competition by any means possible.

Chaupoline

It didn't become the state religion for 300 years after Jesus died. Up until then the Roman Empire was not adverse to attempting to wipe out Christianity by any means possible, starting with the crucifiction of its founder.

spin

Our earliest indications are in Greek. They call the figure Ihsous. You are starting off in conjecture early by using this name Yeshua, for even the Aramaic of the time was thought that it was Yeshu, so you are two steps further away from reality.

Nazareth is not in the earliest strata of the gospels. It was added to the Jesus tradition later.

You seem to accept that the content of the gospels is somehow fundamentally correct without giving reason for believing so. At least you seem to accept the existence of your "Yeshua". Why do you do so?

Indications of credibility are always useful.

Oh, so you are swallowing the rhetoric hook, line and sinker.

This attitude projected onto Pilate, ie "attempting to destroy his religious group", is not supported by the gospel. We have no reason to think that Pilate, if the accounts are veracious, acted in any way other than to dispatch someone who'd made a few disturbances. But evidence for desired destruction of his religious group??

I'm amazed that you so readily accept the story as in some way historical. That needs to be ascertained rather than accepted without a fight.

If Jesus was never crucified, not having existed, it wouldn't be a shock. Saviours tended to die in strange or unpleasant ways. Crucified. Torn apart by wild animals. Killed by orgiastic mob. Etc.

If the resurrection of christ was a metaphor, what else was a metaphor and how would you know?

Mystery religions are funny that way.


spin

Mageth

The "crucifiction" [sic, but I agree] was not performed by the Romans as an attempt to "wipe out Christianity". Christianity didn't exist yet.

Humans tend to be religious. Once the world became "the world" and not local regions, some religions were going to become "major world religions". The accidents of history resulted in us happening to have the "major world religions" we have today. There's no "miracle" there. Christianity just happens to be one of the religions that's survived and thrived.

If it weren't Christianity, it would be something else...and someone like you would be talking about the "miracle" that it survived to become a major world religion!

Chrisitianity is a powerful meme, well-fitted for self-protection and promulgation (including the tendency to strongly suppress rivals and "heresies", its ability to attach itself to governments, and its flexibility that has allowed it to adapt to changes in culture over the centuries). It's not that surprising, really, that it's survived (even through the first three centuries - note that Christianity in various forms and sects was well-ingrained into societies around the Mediterranian by the mid-second Century, and was too deeply imbedded to wipe out easily) and thrived, and evolved into what we see today.

Chaupoline

I like the metaphors of the gospels.

I don't think it was even stated how many people followed Jesus beyond the original twelve disciples. The 12 are a given, but beyond that is not important because they did not initially set themselves apart from the Jews.

That is the way the story was told, and if I am showing it as a metaphor I am going to have follow the story.

Why? Why must there be a fight?

Yes. But Saviors were always warrior kings whom physically destroyed their enemies. Why would there be a story invented about a guy who never led warriors into battle? Let alone one whom was executed by the Roman Empire at the request of the Jewish Authority. Especially at a time when Jewish Zealots were seeking a Jewish warrior king Messiah.

The exorcism of the demon whose name is "Legion" is one clear metaphor. (Matthew 8.28-34; Luke 8.26-39; Mark 5.1-20) Jesus and his disciples come across a man who is possessed by many demons and casts them into a herd of swine. The pigs run off the cliff into the sea and drown. The owner of the pigs goes into the town and tells the town about how Jesus destroyed his livelihood and the townspeople tells Jesus to leave.

This is not a story of magic regarding supernatural demons. The demon possessed man is a man that has many mental problems. Jesus gets rid of his problems and the process destroys a herd of swine. The herd of swine represents an evil industry, sort of like how some people identify the porn industry or whatever. Pigs were seen as unclean animals by the Jews out of protest against Hellenization and Greek culture. The message is that peoples problems come from a general source and if you were to destroy that source then you could eliminate the problems.

When Jesus heals the blind they can see the truth. When Jesus heals the deaf they can hear the truth. When Jesus raises the dead they have become alive again with the knowledge of the truth, and so on.

Chaupoline

Cute, I didn't catch the misspelled word. Crucifixion was performed by Romans as an attempt to discredit the executed and make an examples to any other people who may wish to follow in their footsteps. Even though there was not a group which referred to themselves as Christians at that time, Christians are those whom attemted to follow in Jesus Christ's footsteps. Since the Philosophy of Christ is Christianity, the Romans in effect were attempting to wipe out Christianity.


So are you agreeing with me that the metaphor Christ rising from the dead, speaks of The Philosophy of Jesus Christ arising from the metaphorical dead after his execution?

So simply having the name Christianity is enough to become a world religion? What kind on nonsense is that?

spin

How do you know that this or that is a metaphor and not to be read as written?

On two occasions there were thousands mentioned.

Here you talk about it as it was told and there you talk about metaphoric content.

Texts are not necessarily transparent and the content quite often needs for you to actually do some work.

No, not necessarily.

Adonis never led anyone, nor Dionysus.

Who did the religion initially appeal to if not the lowly and the rejected?

You're assuming a dating mechanism and you are not dealing with the text.

Many people read the text naturalistically. Why shouldn't you? It's not enough to say that this or that is metaphorical, you have to argue the case. Is there an argument in what follows?

This will only work if the text was written in a Jewish context by Jews, yet the earliest gospel was written in a Latin context in Rome by an author (or authors) whose heritage we do not know, other than that he was not directly from a Semitic background due to his lack of expertise with Aramaic.

And when Jesus heals the amputee, they can work or walk, and be whole again.


spin

spamandham

...unless of course, Jesus wasn't actually crucified, in which case we might expect to see exactly what we do see.

You are correct that it makes very little sense for a cult movement to survive the humiliating death of it's leader at the hands of those who are writing the history.

Chaupoline

Because the message makes sense if it is read as a metaphor. If you read Matthew as a Poli Sci text then it sounds more relevant than if you read it as a supernatural story.

Perhaps you would prefer me to say that this is the way that it is written?

But why would you need to fight? I agree that you should work to understand these texts but why must it be a fight?

Because the philosophy I adapted this text too is better suited by my interpretation. If I am to appeal to Christians with my philosophy would it be better if I simply tell them that they are stupid and should abandon everything that they hold dear, or should I instead respect their beliefs and show through their beliefs that my philosophy works with their belief system? Religious texts are just another form of legalism and therefore open to interpretation. You see this with the Salafi Movement and Islam. Secular Progressives are fucking idiots by attacking the religious beliefs of other Americans and thinking that that is a relevant argument. Base beliefs are inconsequential. The overall philosophy is all that is important. All telling Christians that they are stupid for believing in God is going to do is make them pissed off at you. If they try to pull the God said game, then respect their views of God and attack their interpretation and show another interpretation.