Does Jesus mean something to you? |
Post Reply | Page <12 |
Author | ||||
Atavachron
Special Collaborator Honorary Collaborator Joined: September 30 2006 Location: Pearland Status: Offline Points: 65033 |
Posted: November 25 2015 at 22:48 | |||
Jesus means there've been hippies around since the dawn of civilization.
|
||||
"Too often we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought." -- John F. Kennedy
|
||||
*frinspar*
Forum Senior Member Joined: May 27 2008 Location: Arizona Status: Offline Points: 463 |
Posted: November 26 2015 at 00:03 | |||
^
How do you hide money from a hippie? Put it under the soap. |
||||
Atavachron
Special Collaborator Honorary Collaborator Joined: September 30 2006 Location: Pearland Status: Offline Points: 65033 |
Posted: November 26 2015 at 00:08 | |||
^ No doubt. But doesn't work for drugs; they'll find it.
|
||||
"Too often we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought." -- John F. Kennedy
|
||||
*frinspar*
Forum Senior Member Joined: May 27 2008 Location: Arizona Status: Offline Points: 463 |
Posted: November 26 2015 at 00:13 | |||
Put in under a stack of job applications. ;)
|
||||
Sean Trane
Special Collaborator Prog Folk Joined: April 29 2004 Location: Heart of Europe Status: Offline Points: 20080 |
Posted: November 26 2015 at 02:30 | |||
@Ian: At Follix, I don't believe you're talking of the same book than Ian... The first part you speak of is without JoN (to the best of my knowledge) the second part is the recounting of an illuminated lunatic (but peaceful) told 4 times over >> as if we weren't able to understand it the first three times. |
||||
someone_else
Forum Senior Member VIP Member Joined: May 02 2008 Location: Going Bananas Status: Offline Points: 24223 |
Posted: November 26 2015 at 03:06 | |||
A children's book ? I would not read the children a chapter like Judges 19 on Sunday school. But yes, He is the main character in the Bible, the One it's all about. And indeed I believe in what some call "mythological assignments". Jesus is not just a good guy like Gandhi or Madiba, though some similarities may be recognized now and then. And a bid like "I am the way, the truth, and the life: no man cometh unto the Father, but by me." (John 14:6) is ab-so-lute-ly forcing. One can believe this or not.
Edited by someone_else - November 26 2015 at 03:07 |
||||
|
||||
Dean
Special Collaborator Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout Joined: May 13 2007 Location: Europe Status: Offline Points: 37575 |
Posted: November 27 2015 at 05:42 | |||
As an atheist, I'm not sure he even existed since there is no incontrovertible historical evidence that he did. That said, as an atheist I don't have to not believe he existed I just have to not believe he was the son of god, not believe he performed miracles, not believe he rose from the dead and not believe he was born of a virgin. [and let's not get into an argument about atheism being a belief system, that's been done to death - it isn't but perhaps only an atheist can accept that logic]. As far as the documented version of his life goes... it means very little to me because we actually know very little of it (we know of three very brief periods: his birth, going to the temple at age 12 and then the last 3 or 4 years of his life). The bible gave four accounts of his life but what they are is one telling (Matthew), two retellings (Mark and Luke) and one non-synoptic contradiction (John) - and as a chronology they are all a poor record and by no means a history, we cannot even say that Mark and Luke corroborate Matthew's account as it's highly likely they cribbed from him. As others have noted, messianic and mystic figures are not uncommon in mythology, so whether the Jesus story was based upon a real person or a hybrid of various messiahs/mystics is also an unanswerable question. However, it does seem logical that a religion that adopted the name christians (meaning of the anointed one) would have based their faith on a real person who they believed to be the anointed one ('anointed one' in Hebrew: mashiah=messiah, and in Greek: khristos=christ) rather than an imaginary one, and with such undoubtedly charismatic figures, their followers have a tendency to ‘big them up’, especially after they have died, to the extent that it is impossible to separate myth from reality. The whole supernatural element of the account of his life is
a bit of a stumbling block for me. However one thing we do know from the modern
version of the religion that bears his title, is that even in the 21st century
christians are prone to beatify and canonise dead mortals who allegedly
performed apparently supernatural acts that they call miracles without having
actual proof that such events happened. Therefore presuming 1st century
christians would freely attribute fictional supernatural 'miracles' to a
charismatic religious teacher who may or may not have existed doesn't take a
huge leap of the imagination. So I can freely dismiss the miracles such as the
feeding of the five thousand as easily as the early christian church (c. 400CE)
dismissed the apocryphal gospel stories such as Thomas's 2nd Century anecdotal account
of the clay birds miracle allegedly performed by a 5 year old Jesus. So that just leaves his (alleged) teachings
and whether they have relevance to an atheist. Which raises the inevitable atheist view of an improbable
son of an unprovable god side of it… because aside from his aspirational teaching
of love and respect of our fellow man and all the other good humanist things he
is reported to have said, which we can pretty much all agree are “a good thing”,
the canonical gospels also report him saying a lot of things that (according to C.S. Lewis)
would have him as either “a madman, a liar or the son of god”, [though in the modern
PC age it would probably be more appropriate to re-state them as “deluded,
deceitful or divine”]. Of course Lewis was arguing for the divinity of Jesus,
not against it, but from an atheist perspective the "divine” is simply
removed from the table without further discussion because if we do not believe
that gods exist then his disciples’ claims that he said he was the son of a god
can also not be believed… either he never made such claims and the disciples
were deceitful or he did and therefore he was either deluded or deceitful. Of
course none of that negates or sullies any of his humanist teachings; it just
questions whether a non-believer should regard him as an aspirational teacher
or simply someone who said some things that we agree with. Personally, I go for
the latter. Edited by Dean - November 27 2015 at 08:07 |
||||
What?
|
||||
Icarium
Forum Senior Member VIP Member Joined: March 21 2008 Location: Tigerstaden Status: Offline Points: 34055 |
Posted: November 27 2015 at 06:29 | |||
Next topic logicly would be, is the persued villan in the story of Jesus, Judas of Ischariot, a antagonistic villion of worst sort, a teller and a backstaber, or the most sane and reasonable guy of Jesus disciples. And should Judas be "given" a pleigh for freedom from eternal petrifying.
|
||||
|
||||
micky
Special Collaborator Honorary Collaborator Joined: October 02 2005 Location: . Status: Offline Points: 46833 |
Posted: November 27 2015 at 06:41 | |||
means nothing to me personally...a great character of a much beloved fable but at least he was the inspiration to one hell of a great Doobies song.
oh I need to put that on.. like right now. and wake the neighbors! |
||||
The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip
|
||||
UMUR
Special Collaborator Honorary Collaborator Joined: October 19 2007 Location: Denmark Status: Offline Points: 3068 |
Posted: November 27 2015 at 06:46 | |||
I like the story, but I don´t see it as anything but a fairytale with a few historical truths here and there.
|
||||
lazland
Prog Reviewer Joined: October 28 2008 Location: Wales Status: Offline Points: 13511 |
Posted: November 27 2015 at 16:37 | |||
All serious historians, from ancient to modern, accept that Jesus was a historical figure, and lived, taught, and died in first century Judea. The evidence is overwhelming. The rest of your post, not quoted here, as to the accuracy of the gospels, or whether He was the son of God, rose from the dead, was Christ the Redeemer, and the rest, is the part which is either open to question, or a matter of faith. |
||||
Enhance your life. Get down to www.lazland.org
|
||||
The Dark Elf
Forum Senior Member VIP Member Joined: February 01 2011 Location: Michigan Status: Offline Points: 12984 |
Posted: November 27 2015 at 17:31 | |||
I'm not quite sure the evidence is "overwhelming"; in fact, most of the events of Jesus' life were written as hearsay well after he died, and that would include mentions by Josephus and Tacitus. However, given the area where the events took place and its relative unimportance as a Roman backwater territory, the amount of chronicled evidence would be at a minimum in any case (it's not like Pontius Pilate, a Prefect of the province, had that much more firsthand biographical information -- nearly all is after the fact). That being said, it is not unreasonable to consider that there was an historical Jesus; after all, there is no firsthand information regarding Gautama Buddha either. But the message is what is important, even if one divorces the divine. As an atheist, I certainly have tried to integrate their humanistic and benevolent tenets in my life. |
||||
...a vigorous circular motion hitherto unknown to the people of this area, but destined
to take the place of the mud shark in your mythology... |
||||
Icarium
Forum Senior Member VIP Member Joined: March 21 2008 Location: Tigerstaden Status: Offline Points: 34055 |
Posted: November 27 2015 at 18:10 | |||
well Sokrates is also questioned if he were real or not, annet just ĺ mere constructed of Plato
|
||||
|
||||
JJLehto
Prog Reviewer Joined: April 05 2006 Location: Tallahassee, FL Status: Offline Points: 34550 |
Posted: November 27 2015 at 22:40 | |||
Nope.
I do think Jesus, (yeah I know no proof but I personally say he probably did exist) was a good man (yes, a human, no divinity) who was probably enlightened...would be the best way for me to put it...and said all the good things about us being good to each other. Also, as the Pope is now demonstrating, he probably said some other very intriguing things that got glossed over by history. That said does he mean anything to me? Nah. Can't say there's a second ever I think about Jesus or feel there's been any impact on my thinking/behavior/outlook. Honestly, people I've seen on Youtube with videos on how to think and live life better mean far more to me
Edited by JJLehto - November 27 2015 at 22:41 |
||||
Sean Trane
Special Collaborator Prog Folk Joined: April 29 2004 Location: Heart of Europe Status: Offline Points: 20080 |
Posted: November 28 2015 at 01:43 | |||
actually, as an atheist, I don't have a single doubt that this Jesus dude existed and claimed to be something he couldn't have been (he can't be the son of something that doesn't exist)... Ditto for Mahommet, that violent, selfish, arrivist dude (something apparently Jesus was not) also existed.... now none of them two have any more legitimacy than say Rael or the Mormon dude... They're just prophets prophetising pure BS |
||||
Dean
Special Collaborator Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout Joined: May 13 2007 Location: Europe Status: Offline Points: 37575 |
Posted: November 28 2015 at 03:28 | |||
Most historians accept that he was a historical figure and some do not, but the evidence is far from overwhelming because there isn't any contemporary evidence and only two later accounts. Josephus and Tacitus were writing some 60-80 years after the crucifixion so neither of them were contemporaries of Jesus - they were not reporting witnessed events or even documenting second-hand witnessed accounts. Where they got their information from is an other matter - it is quite probably from the early christians themselves (i.e., the same verbal re-telling of the story that Matthew drew upon to write his gospel). There are even questions over the authenticity of the relevant passages in their writing. For example. From the perspective of a non-christian atheist reading an account by a non-christian jew writing for non-christian/non-jewish gentile patrons then the following passage from Josephus doesn't ring true: "Now there was about this time Jesus, a wise man, if it be lawful to call him a man; for he was a doer of wonderful works, a teacher of such men as receive the truth with pleasure." In the first century of the common era only a christian would write about Jesus in that way, ergo it was probably added later by a christian scholar, which raises doubts over the only other mention of Jesus being the christ in his Antiquities of the Jews. The overwhelming evidence from the perspective of a christian is the new testament itself, and that from the perspective of an atheist is not overwhelming, incontrovertible or even compelling. However, as I said, it is unlikely that a faith would have developed around a person who did not exist, and that is the circumstantial evidence that he existed. Do I believe he existed? Probably, but not beyond reasonable doubt.
Correct, which is why I presaged practically everything with "as an atheist".
Edited by Dean - November 28 2015 at 04:47 |
||||
What?
|
||||
jayem
Forum Senior Member Joined: June 21 2006 Location: Switzerland Status: Offline Points: 995 |
Posted: November 28 2015 at 08:22 | |||
Hello !
My cap off to those many thought up spicy answers. Some ways of elaborating posts make me think of computing languages where everything must be thought up in every detail for a program to work steadily....Amazing ! Beyond the issue of whether or not it is true and can be proven, what interests me about Jesus is why it's very likely that christian(-like) faith should exist one day on any inhabited planet, what questions faith gives answers to, and what hopes... Why we do have those questions, what we want or need, and what we get. Also what difference it makes with or without faith in Jesus (by comparison to other faiths, or no religious faith). Jesus is most significantly the defender of that very special concept of a God being a temporary massacred loser, a sign that no justice can be expected in this life, while there's the more hope for justice in another life. For this life we have the very puzzling "love" commandment: one should love each other like Jesus did love us. How Jesus did love us must mean that one should help each other become as holy-spirited as possible, and seek for fairness and justice for all, yet all of this takes much testing on how one can expect people to react; it takes getting to know oneself... What's called holy-spirited may be closely linked to what's said on Matthew 25:40 "whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me". The remaining things told in the Bible have less originality... |
||||
Post Reply | Page <12 |
Forum Jump | Forum Permissions You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum |