J-D

It is documented in the canon that Obi-Wan Kenobi told Luke Skywalker that Darth Vader had killed his (Luke's) father.

Chili

They are not crooks, self proclaimed Christians are still pharisees today with a mandatory 10% of the gross, is it? to make sure that Jesus comes first.

So also with homosexuality being called sin, for whom until recently his own bedroom was not private domain.

Jaybees

That's a commentary that crept into the original text.

TedM

Makes sense to me. A vision of a risen Savior is not an adequate explanation. Sure, people believe just about anything, but not if it isn't presented in a 'convincing' manner, AND it fulfills somle need(s) for those who believe it.

You've enhanced this thread greatly by demonstrating repeatedly that the explanations of the history given by most people here are partial explanations at best because they fail to address the above questions adequately.

steve_bnk

This just came to mind. I read his book The Third Eye when I was a kid.

Example of a fabrication based on an existing theology.

The guy was a Brit who claimed he was inhabited by the spirit of a dead Tibetan. While he did not lead up to a new tradition as Christianity did, it represents how easy it is even in modern times to fabricate a set o teachings and writings, and people will follow all by themselves .

in the link a college pro in a class on rbet had the students read the book, who thought it to be authentic.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lobsang_Rampa

'...n November 1956 a book called The Third Eye was published in the United Kingdom. It was written by a man named Tuesday Lobsang Rampa and purported to relate his experiences while growing up in a monastery in Tibet after being sent there at the age of seven...

Explorer and Tibetologist Heinrich Harrer was unconvinced about the book's origins and hired a private detective from Liverpool named Clifford Burgess to investigate Rampa. The findings of Burgess' investigation were published in the Daily Mail in February 1958. It was reported that the author of the book was a man named Cyril Henry Hoskin, who had been born in Plympton, Devon, in 1910 and was the son of a plumber. Hoskin had never been to Tibet and spoke no Tibetan. In 1948, he had legally changed his name to Carl Kuon Suo before adopting the name Lobsang Rampa. An obituary of Fra Andrew Bertie, Grand Master of the Sovereign Military Order of Malta, claims that he was involved in unmasking Lobsang Rampa as a West Country plumber.[1]

Rampa was tracked by the British press to Howth, Ireland, and confronted with these allegations. He did not deny that he had been born as Cyril Hoskin, but claimed that his body was now occupied by the spirit of Lobsang Rampa. According to the account given in his third book, The Rampa Story, he had fallen out of a fir tree in his garden in Thames Ditton, Surrey, while attempting to photograph an owl. He was concussed and on regaining his senses had seen a Buddhist monk in saffron robes walking towards him. The monk spoke to him about Rampa taking over his body and Hoskin agreed, saying that he was dissatisfied with his current life. When Rampa's original body became too worn out to continue, he took over Hoskin's body in a process of transmigration of the soul...'



His website or someone selling his image. .

http://www.lobsangrampa.net/

'...Lobsang Rampa was a buddhist monk and a medical Doctor, who was born in Tibet. After many tribulations and much travelling he eventually settled in Canada near the end of his life and so experienced life in both the east and the west. Dr. Rampa was a revolutionary of his time, one of the first of the Eastern teachers to bring buddhism and metaphysics to the West in a popular fashion. He wrote many books about spiritual matters, beginning with "The Third Eye".

Lobsang Rampa teaches us the timeless universal truths, pointing us along the spiritual path. Dr. Rampa's books also discuss the state of humanity's progress and he shows us how we can be a positive force for good, thus improving ourselves and helping our fellow humans and all sentient beings...'

He has a following.

dog-on

Hmmm, JC to Paul; Gabriel to Mo; the family divine to Joe Smith... Yea, a vision is not an adequate explanation to allow some to convince anyone...

TedM

Paul's vision was supplemented by a lot of of biblical and theological background, and the message met very pressing needs for Jewish salvation..Joe Smith's claims were accepted in great part because they explained what many were feeling was a great injustice: no message of salvation given to the Indians.

In addition, it helps when the message giver has something extraordinary to present -- either a strange coincidence, or great oratory skill, for example. In Joe Smith's case his ability to create the Mormon bible is seen by many as an example of extra-ordinary ability not available to the average person (ie required a very good memory).

James The Least

This kind of thing goes on all the time. Invention and re-invention. Cyril Henry Hoskin only admitted that he actually wasn't a Tibetan monk born Lobsang Ramsa after the Daily Mail exposed him. Using typical religious strategies, you could just say that the Daily Mail and the private investigators who exposed his fraud were agents of Satan bent on destroying the true religion in these last days. Hoskin went on to write several more books pretending to be a Tibetan monk.

Something like this happened 2,000 years ago. But the "Cyril Henry Hoskin" behind the Jesus myth never had to worry about the Daily Mail. By the time he was dead, nobody could prove it didn't really happen.

Davka

No, more of a splinter group. Judaism was splintered before 70 CE, but only a few of the groups survived. Christianity appears to be a later addition, in the same basic mold as the Zealots, Essenes, and other apocalyptic/messianic/revolutionary groups.

Think in terms of the fringe Baptist groups. They hold to the essential teachings of the Baptist Church, but their attitude towards the Southern Baptist Convention is "you're doing it wrong."

Davka

BibleJesus was opposed to the Pharisees, but his doctrinal positions were Pharisaical. He stood with them on all the major doctrinal issues, he simply saw them as corrupt crooks who preached the truth but lived a lie.