Amaleq13

IMO, collective hallucination explains the experiences of the risen Christ but it really doesn't differentiate between MJ and HJ. I thought I had already mentioned that but it might have been in a different thread.

The difference between an MJ and HJ explanation, in terms of collective hallucination, is that the nature of the inspiration. Both, I think, involve the general sense that the traditional Messiah needed to be reinterpreted but the former would have Scripture as the inspiration while the latter would have an individual who made a powerful impression on his immediate followers.

In terms of powerful psychological influence, neither potential source of inspiration is demonstrably superior or more likely though a charismatic individual is probably more easily understood by modern minds.

No Robots

Perhaps he would. As I noted above, fictional characters have made a strong impact on me.

We're trying to arrive at the truth here, on the assumption that the truth matters.

No Robots

Obviously my analogy isn't working for you. Forget it.

No Robots

I guess you could say we also got along perfectly well without Copernicus, Plato, Einstein, Edison, and Mozart. Absolutely vital? Yeah, in my estimation, he's one of maybe a handful who's work is absolutely vital to the well being of humanity.

No Robots

I am certain that I know the essential facts in this matter, yes.

I deny the claim that it is unreasonable, based on the evidence, to assert Christ's historicity.

Amaleq13

That begs the question of whether the "truth" of the identity of the individual who taught them matters more to you than the "truth" of the teachings.

No Robots

In this case, as I said above, the teacher and his teachings are one and the same: he is teaching us about himself.

Amaleq13

Only if you read the Gospels very selectively and favor the version of the story attributed to John over the others.

No Robots

I'm not making this up on my own:

To comprehend Christ is to comprehend his Self-consciousness—this godless, world-free, blessed mystical Self-consciousness, for which there are no analogies and no other examples.

Brunner, Our Christ, p. 166.

Certainly, John provides the deepest look into this self-consciousness, but at the price of introducing theological speculation, and thus opening the door to the pagan divinizing of Christ.

Sparrow

Perhaps you have some evidence the rest of us do not. I am certain I do not have all the essential facts, and believe it probable that no one ever will.

To assert, or to prove? Asserting, as we see frequently, takes little more than the imagination to dream it up and the ability to generate the keystrokes. And sometimes the imagination part is left out. I can refer you to some example threads if you like.

Your statement here is full of weasel words and a double negative, both of which make me wonder if you are unwilling to simply say what you really seem to believe; That the historicity of Jesus Christ is certain and there are no other possible explanations. If Jesus was real, then there are a long list of questions posted earlier that demand explanation. If Jesus was a myth, it seems to me there's a shorter list. YMMV. What also seems to seep out is your emotional attachment to some as yet undisclosed conventional Christian upbringing. When asked of what specific, unique teaching Jesus offered, your response sounded to me like something a New Ager would spit out. Your defense of historicity seems founded solely on "we need his (so far unidentified) unique teachings, which will cease to exist if he is found to be mythical, so we must not even consider that as a possible explanation". I'm more interested in the truth, if we can find it, and being honest about it if we can't. I've already realized that virtually everything my childhood church taught was a lie, even if they did not realize it. I now know that many of the teachings ascribed to Jesus were not original with him and whether they were discovered thousands of years before the purported life of Christ or last week, I can evaluate and test them for their usefulness to me now.

I can find useful guidelines for living life and participating in community from a number of sources. Some are known to be historical, others known to be fiction and some are of unknown provenance. How I decide if they are useful is not by either their age nor their popularity, but by how I can use my own intellect to reconcile them to the reality I perceive.