Chili

There is no doubt that many historical Jesus' existed if "the Jerusalem on high is freeborn" and therefore it is the height of stupidity to invent a particular historical Jesus that might fit this place. It is absurd, really, but I guess anything is fair game in a world where money and fame knows no shame.

Juliana

???
"... money and fame knows no shame."
What and whom do you mean by that? Do you have anything of substance to say? Or is this the general level "of you guys" here? Isn't this kind of insulting, ad hominem again?
There were not "many historical Jesuses", there was just one, Divus Iulius, the highest God of the entire Empire who was elevated to the gods by the will of the people and then underwent an enormous mutation in the East of the Empire among the descendants of Caesar's veterans. (Theo)politics of Vespasianus was also involved. What more do you want?

I find it quite amusing to read comments like that on an Infidels discussion forum. What is this really all about here? I thought it's a discussion on "Biblical Criticism and History" in general and who the historical Jesus was in particular.

That mystery has been solved, whether you like it or not. If you prefer to believe in the biblical Jesus who supposedly walked on water, changed it into wine and raised the dead (in the physicial/biological sense), that's fine too. There are also those who believe in Santa Claus and the tooth fairy. But in order to do research on the history of religion you must set aside your belief or you can't do reasonable work in that field at all, because you will always find what you "know" (believe) already.

Chili

In defense of this bulletin board I want you to notice that I am not a Bible critic but a critic of bible critics and that includes those who try to raise the historic Jesus and now bury him for the last time as the end of religion.

Let me just ask you to explain my passage that "the Jerusalem on high is freeborn" and how you reduce this to one Jesus who's name is Caesar (and there is probably a hundred more passages like that if you wish). The mystery was solved long before you came along trying to peddle your stupid idea as if it is the end of religion; ie "the mystery is solved."

To walk on water is to go through life based on intuition which in the bible is called the Celestial sea that was no longer in the new world of the now ex believer (Rev.21:1). To change water into wine is to have been at the Royal Banquet where the evolutional period (second half) of life begins, and to raise the dead is equal to raising the city of God in its full splendor of beauty with those we met at the banquet where the Thousand Year Reign is revealed. = is to know who you really are and being able to count on it.

It's a metaphysical event, and my comments were meant to be a slam against the promotion of a stupid book that presents one historical Jesus who died long ago and who you now identify to solve the mystery of faith (yes it is a shame to be peddling your garbage to innocent dead souls).

Juliana

I'm going to ignore your rants as of now. Just one question for you to think about.
Is it possible that you do not understand the nature of faith?
The book does not "try to raise the historic Jesus and now bury him for the last time as the end of religion". Rather it proves that there indeed was an historical Jesus and an historical Easter, believers have reason to rejoice.

Laudetur JC

Chili

To solve the mystery of faith is to close the book on religion (unless you are faithless believer who needs a piece of the ark to justify your beliefs forever).

Easter is when the "the night shall be no more" because the Lord ourGod shall be our light. It is only when we see the light of common day as an illusion that the night shall be no more and that will be the day when faith comes to an end (Rev. 21:22; 22:5).

Yes I understand faith but would never attach it to history if it must be brought to understanding.