Half-Life

www.earlychristianwritings.com

There are no writings like these in other religions. Other religions only have holy books with no historical writings.

Christianity has all these writings attributing to Jesus, we don't just have the 4 gospels. Do you see it? What was going on in that first century?

Vorkosigan

What satisfaction do you think was obtained by the forgers of Hebrews, the 7 inauthentic Pauline epistles, third Corinthians, the Paul-Seneca correspondence, the longer version of Acts, the apocryphal acts, and numerous other forged texts of early Christianity?

Clearly not, or forgery would not have been so widespread in early Christianity.

hatsoff

Only a very few of those are even close to contemporary. Also, many other religions do indeed have corresponding historical writings. Christianity is very unique, but so are many other religions.

I'm not trying to challenge your faith, though. Actually, it's good that you're asking these questions; it speaks to a healthy curiosity about the origins of your religion. However, the internet is not always the best place to find answers. Try reading Eusebius' Ecclesiastical History Of The Church.

Chunk

Where does the idea of them abandoning their leader come from?

Has this ever happend in history before? Can you name any other groups of people from more modern times that are believed to have done this after the fall of thier group or death of a leader?

From the reading ive done, it seems to be accepted that small belief groups rarely continue after the death of a significant leader.

Especially an astoundingly strong belief that the beloved leader didn't really die and the movement didn't really fail.

Is the bond between a millitary leader and a follower ever as strong as that between a mother and child? Would such a lie be made up for somebody who is already dead, surely there would have been better ways to continue the movement. Is one parent lieing for a child the same as a group of followers lieing for their leader?

I dont understand the point youre making. How would the people who concocted the lie about Jesus, "know" it was the truth. Are you trying to suggest that the people they told their new "truth" to would willingly believe it because somebody was telling them it was the truth, and wouldnt think to check it out for themselves first?

Wouldnt the fact that they were Jewish, loved God and were waiting for a Messiah mean that it would be important to them to make sure there was some evidence about this Messiah before they went ahead and believed in him?

The first Christians werent being told about Jesus 2000 years after he was around either. It wasnt even 200 years after. Will people be willing to die for Star wars in 2206?

How can a large number of people mistake fact for fiction, such a short time after it (supposedly) happened, on a matter of such importance.

Its not like it would have been a trivial matter, surely they would have given it some thought before deciding to believe in it? How much thought does it take to decide if the first world war was fact or fiction?

Somebody is hungry for attention ... so they claim to have known the Messiah and make a story about him? Other people are then happy to go along with this and believe it? No matter how simple the original story, surely there would need to be something to persuade people to believe it.

Some then believe it enough to make up their own additions to further the fake story? This seems unlikely to me. Surely people would have to have spent a geat deal of time and effort in spreading this message. Who would do that if there was nothing to say it was true?

Would you dedicate the next month to spreading a message about a Messiah that some random attention seeker told you on the street? No, of course not, and Im sure it would have been more than a month for them.

DaMan121

Chunk, have you read any of the other posts giving examples: Scientology, Mormonism, Islam, Koresh and other cults? I love the scientology example in particular, because its recent, is clearly based on fiction, yet millions by into it. Besides, you are painting a very flawed picture of Christianity "surviving" 2000 years. Since its "invention" it has evolved to such a degree that it bares little resenblance to the early 'church' (Heck look at the past 100 years), and has splintered into thousands of different sects (not MINOR difference, MAJOR ones that led to WARS).

Who said Jesus was the significant leader? He is only the symbol, hardly the leader or founder of Christianity.

Again, this can be said for any of the thousands of religions in the past and present. Face it, your beliefs are just as (un)likely as any random religion.

Diogenes the Cynic

From the Gospel of Mark, namely.
The Mormon movement continued after the lynching of Joseph Smith. The American Civil Rights movement continued after the death of Martin Luther King. Martyred leaders often serve as inspiration for religious or political movements.
You need to do some more reading.
There is no good evidence that such a belief existed among the direct followers of Jesus. The first unambiguous claim for a physical resurrection doesn't show up in extant Christian literature until the Gospel of Matthew, more than 50 years after the alleged crucifixion. There are no eyewitness accounts of Jesus and no first hand accounts for the resurrection. Nothing in the entire New Testament was written by anyone who ever met Jesus.
We know that the devotion of followers for religious leaders leaders can be unbelievably strong, and indeed often do exceed devotion to family. Just look at Jim Jones or david Koresh.
There is no good evidence that any direct follower of Jesus ever claimed he had been physically resurrected.
The suggestion here is that they didn't think they were "concocting a lie." They sincerely thought they were discovering what was "true" from poring over scripture, from personal "revelations," etc. This would be especially true of Paul.
People believe all kinds of rubbish and how could they possibly "check it out?"
The audience for Pauline Christianity was not Jewish and FYI, the Jewish Messiah is not someone who needs to be "believed in." He's not an object of worship, he's just a human king, and he's not the Messiah until he fulfills certain expectations (none of which were fulfilled by Jesus).
Maybe. Who knows? People die for all kinds of stupid beliefs.
There was a guy in California who told people he was from outer space and that they should chop their own balls off. They did it. Then he told them to wash down a bunch pills with some vodka so they could leave their bodies and go to a spaceship on the other side of a comet. They did it. David Koresh told a bunch of people he was Jesus and they believed him. He told them God wanted him to have sex with their ten year old daughters and they believed him. He told them to kill themselves and their children and they did it. History is full of crazy leaders and people who believe them. It's completely unremarkable.
They thought it WAS true, They thought the Hebrew Bible gave them real information about Jesus. They were deluding themselves of course, but that's what religious fanatics do.
I wouldn't, but lots of people would, in a manner of speaking. You're oversimplifying the process, though. These congregations were built up slowly over time. It took generations and it still failed completely within Judaism.

Amaleq13

The Gospels. You haven't read them?

"And they all forsook him, and fled." (Mark 14:50, KJV)

"But all this was done, that the scriptures of the prophets might be fulfilled. Then all the disciples forsook him, and fled." (Matthew 26:56, KJV)

Can you name any other group of people who were willing to commit suicide (after the males had themselves castrated) so as to be taken into space on a ship that only appeared to be a comet? If not, does the unique nature of their beliefs make them more likely to be true?

It is my understanding that David Koresh continues to have followers to this day.

It is also my understanding that at least some of those followers hold beliefs quite close to what you describe. They continue to believe he is the new Messiah and continue to expect him to return to vindicate them.

You must not know very many Marines.

You have failed to comprehend the power of the described psychological forces. The mother does not consider her faith in her son to be a lie.

pharoah

I think that someone here pointed out some of the strong parallels between this and the Joseph story. Here are some that I came up with on a quick reading.

Jacob had twelve sons.
Jesus had twelve disciples.

Joseph was abandoned by his 11 brothers.
Jesus was abandoned by the 11 remaining disciples.

Judah came up with the idea of selling Joseph to the Midianites.
Judas sold Jesus to the Sanhedrin.

The Midianites delivered Joseph to the Egyptians.
The Sanhedrin delivered Jesus to the Romans.

Joseph saves all of the world from famine.
Jesus saves all of the world from sin.

Joseph says that his captivity was the work of God.
Jesus says that his cruxifiction was the work of God.

Joseph says that he was sent by God to preserve his brothers posterity.
Jesus says that he was sent by God to establish the Kingdom of God.

Joseph gives his brothers the best of the land in Egypt.
Jesus promises his disciples the best places in the kingdom of heaven.

hatsoff

I hate to gang up on Chunk, but he is clearly mistaken:

Nope. See, people aren't generally very intelligent. They will believe what they are told. Consider the modern-day example of Scientology.

They might have had some personal stake in it. A prophet is more revered than a common man.

Not me, but maybe someone else--particularly among young folks. How many teenagers embrace wicca because it's "cool"? People do all kinds of stupid, innane things.

Huon

Yes. The people who concocted the lie (i would'nt say "lie", perhaps "story")about Jesus, knew it was not a lie, but The Truth. Their truth, certainly not the truth for everybody.

How could a Roman believer, in Rome, many years after the alleged story, could check it out for himself ? Those who could check (perhaps) were not interested, and those who would have been interested could not check.