Freethought & Rationalism ArchiveThe archives are read only. |
06-25-2008, 12:10 PM | #11 |
Regular Member
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Seattle Area
Posts: 116
|
However "he" came about, it was a friggin' master-stroke, wasn't it? Never mind the "fully human, fully god" stuff, or the "spirit on earth" interpretations. The common man related to Jesus, the common man/god, and didn't sweat the details like the church fathers did. In the end, there was this "dude" (as Homer Simpson might say) that went around healing folks and spreading the news that God loved them, and then was tortured and killed for no good reason, and then stuffed it back in the face of "the man" by coming back to life and saving the whole world. Never mind that it never really happened, or that he never really existed, or that the resulting dogma is an amalgam of Jewish apocalyptism, Platonism and earlier Christ/Son of God cults. The "dude" made it all work on a personal level. When all is said and done, it's a ripping good story.
|
06-25-2008, 12:50 PM | #12 | |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: ירושלים
Posts: 1,701
|
Quote:
|
|
06-25-2008, 01:10 PM | #13 |
Regular Member
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Seattle Area
Posts: 116
|
Yeah, I buy into the Jesus as Myth garbage, as you call it. I'm not saying you couldn't locate a living human circa 1 A.D. to tie the Q sayings to, but his name wasn't necessarily "Jesus" and he certainly didn't live the life described in GMark.
|
06-25-2008, 01:14 PM | #14 |
Veteran Member
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: ירושלים
Posts: 1,701
|
Nah, excuse Q for a moment, but he was most likely Jesus (what evidence is there to point otherwise?) and he was crucified by Pilate (as all the ancient sources attest). Son of God? Nah.
|
06-25-2008, 01:49 PM | #15 |
Contributor
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: London UK
Posts: 16,024
|
But why go to all the trouble - and it was a lot of trouble - to write that very intricate story GMark about an ordinary bloke who Pilate deaded?
And your comment about Paul and gnostics doesn't make sense. Have you read Pagels, the Gnostic Paul? |
06-25-2008, 02:26 PM | #16 | |
Regular Member
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Seattle Area
Posts: 116
|
Quote:
|
|
06-25-2008, 04:23 PM | #17 | |||
Veteran Member
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: ירושלים
Posts: 1,701
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
|||
06-25-2008, 05:28 PM | #18 | |
Regular Member
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: 1/2 mile west of the Rio sin Grande
Posts: 397
|
Quote:
By the way, I fully agree that "apostolic succession" was crucial in establishing the authority of (whoever) was running the institution. Yet the Gnostics claimed their own apostolic authority. So, by itself, that doesn't resolve the problem. |
|
06-25-2008, 05:33 PM | #19 | |||
Veteran Member
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Colorado
Posts: 8,674
|
Quote:
http://www.rationalrevolution.net/ar...th_history.htm Quote:
http://www.rationalrevolution.net/ar...history.htm#14 Quote:
|
|||
06-25-2008, 08:53 PM | #20 |
Contributor
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: the fringe of the caribbean
Posts: 18,988
|
It was Constantine that SAVED the followers of Jesus of Nazareth with their Jesus story.
Trypho, in the middle of the 2nd century, called the vigin birth Jesus story a "monstrous phenomena", and foolishness like Greek myths It was a poltician that saved the Christianity. The story wasn't really good. |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
|