Toto

Jesus Research: An International Perspective (or via: amazon.co.uk), James H. Charlesworth and Petr Pokorny, eds.

Previewed on Google books.

All of the contributors appear to be theologians. The preface notes that they "avoid the non-precise term 'historical Jesus.'"

From the intro by James H. Charlesworth:

jgoodguy

The lack of hard evidence means that only informed speculation is available. That means a divergent number of views because there is no way to determine the truth from competing views.

wordy

What does it mean when James H. Charlesworth says: "How can such divergent views be possible when all scholars employ a disinterested scientific methodology? "

Does he say that *I want us all to agree upon a disinterested scientific methodology? *

And then he outline what he hopes could be agreed upon?

Or does he throw his hands up in the air as a gesture of despair and giving up all hope for such to mature?

wordy

Ulrich Luz has an essay in that book named

Founding Christianity: Comparing Jesus and Japanese "New Religions".

I wonder if that is about Shin Buddhism of the Shinran variety? Amidism as some name it.

Amidism is about entrusting faith in vows by a human. Jesus too made a vow.

If you have faith in me and do my Father's will then you will be with me in Heaven. something.

I wonder why Luz hopes Japanese versions of Buddhism will help us get Jesus?

wordy

Fun to read that essay by Luz, he compared Jesus with three Japanese founders of "New Religious Movements in Japan.

I liked Konko faith best. Not that I agree with them but they seems friendly in attitude.

Very much like a Pan-en-theism. The Universe are God's body and all of us are interdependently part of God and has that of God withing us. God seen as our Parent.

We can talk to God always and as part of God we are always returning to God when we die so no Heaven or Hell. We are already in God's body but being in a body makes us distant from the ways of God so we need to relate to the ways of God and God as our caring parent wants all of us to be happy and thus we are obliged to make everybody happy too. The goal is to be like God in attitude.

Much easier to read the text at one of their sites on the internet.

http://www.konkokyo.or.jp/eng/bri/be...s_beliefs.html

Short version here?

http://www.konkokyo.or.jp/eng/bri/be..._precepts.html

How they behave in real life could be very different but theoretically their faith is simple and friendly???

I wish one could make a totally naturalistic such friendly faith that have no supernatural claims and that encouraged people to help each other.

Toto

Luz is writing sociology of religion, in which the the content of the beliefs is not very important.

You should be able to read most of that chapter on Google books. It is a very curious essay - it raises some interesting ideas, but Luz states that he does not read Japanese, and is basing the chapter on a four month stay in Japan in 2004, in which he discussed the "new religions" of Japan with some interested parties. He draws some parallels between Jesus and the founding members of these Japanese new religions.

wordy

Yes it is a bit remote, I agree. Maybe it derail the thread too much to continue it here so I started a new thread about it in the "Evidence of Gods" department.

The Universe seen as a caring Parent. Humans as His/Her's beloved Children?

http://www.freeratio.org/showthread....03#post6135303

The Golden Light Universe as our Parent is a kind of God. Jesus too talks about the Parent God but name him Abba or Father.

The Konko is neutral Gender so only patriarch language traditions makes it male.

The parallels are that as a Christian you come to God through the teaching of Jesus and the Holy Spirit.

This is a bit parallel in Konko in that you come to the Parent through the teaching of the Founder of Konko faith and he is seen as the first Mediator to the Parent of us all.

Similar to Christian faith is that every one of us can pray directly to God and talk to him as our Parent that cares for us. Very similar too is that God's will is carried out through the acts of the believers altruistic work for the poor and needy. A central theme in some Christian interpretations. We are God's hands to do his will.

Similar is that one listen to the will of God through the teaching and that the role of the Mediator is to interpret the will of the Universe (God) by giving the teaching in a sincere way.

Differences are that there is no Heaven or Hell. And you kind of don't have sin in Konko.

You can ignore the ways of the Universe and be selfish and distant from what the Parent wants us to be but that creates sorrow and thus your selfish ways punish itself through the consequences of not being in line with the law of the Universe which is interdependence and cooperation for to be happy together.

Kind of. I don't know anything about it only try to retell it in my own words.

Sorry poor grammar. Should it be?:
I know nothing about it I only try to retell it using my own words.


Most likely I fail but we can take that in the thread I created for it.

Clivedurdle

Once upon a time there was probably a more divergent view in Physics about is light a particle or a wave.

Bloke got a Nobel prize for a solution to this, and not for the stuff he is more famous for! He then spent the rest of his life thinking nah that can't be right, but continuing to stack up more evidence for quantum mechanics.

If we live with these divergent views and try to work out what patterns do fit them we might get there.

Hint, start somewhere else than a real person at the base. Imaginary, Schroedinger's Jesi?

hylidae

I think he's suggesting that if they are using a disinterested scientific methodology, there wouldn't or shouldn't be such a divergence of views. As someone pointed out, the less evidence, the more guesswork, and therefore the varied views. More evidence would mean someone has to change his views according to the new information. So I guess it's not all that disinterested if someone's hanging on to views without evidence...

wordy

That seems likely to be what he actually intend to say.

We would need to find more texts that shows how they changed over a long time how they looked upon Jesus. How they viewed him.

Sometimes when I read the Bible Jesus looks like a very small human. A child of his time. Not even on par with the bright people of his time.

He reminds me of uneducated street preachers we had in 1970 the Jesus Movement. Charismatic dealers in religion.

He is not on the level of the intellectuals of his time. He is more like the Tele-Evangelists we have now in Channel after Channel owning their own Christian TV and Radio station doing Talk Shows and Sunday preaching.

so now wonder the Catholic Church had to employ their best minds to write so many books explaining what he was behind this mediocre surface of Millenialistic Dooms Day preacher and Healer throwing out Demons and such snake oil tricks.

I would not be surprised if the truth about a historical Jesus would be a very ordinary "Sect Leader" but in the fashion they where that way back in time.

Would he be much different from "Simon Bar Kokhba"?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Simon_bar_Kokhba

Jesus most likely was not a military revolt but a revolt that used moralistic emotional rhetoric that made people make up a partly hidden "counter culture" and such are dangerous to dictator rulers too.

Recent example are the Post Modernism in University slowly taking over from within. No need to make a bloody revolution you just replace the rulers with people loyal to the new interpretation of who has the agenda of political power . An informa hierarchy set up using words and attitudes and ways to see the world.