|
Post by shadrack on Feb 7, 2018 1:47:43 GMT
^ This Lord, Liar and Lunatic all make the same underlying assumption: that Jesus actually made the claims the bible says he made. But why do we take this assumption for granted? Those who propose this question always leave out the fourth and (IMO) most likely option which is LEGEND meaning the bible's description of Jesus' life, and particularly his claims, are not historically accurate.
|
|
|
Post by goz on Feb 7, 2018 1:55:06 GMT
General misinterpretation. Jesus was a presenter to a path of salvation. So you don't believe he's the only path? Brother what sort of Christian are you exactly? I ask because your views are very unorthodox. IMHO Gad is a high end hipster intelligentsia Agnostic Theist with Christianity on the side with his kale salad of new age ideas and strong deep faith in God coffee. Unorthodoxy is cool as long as it is based on a long held intellectual base of earthy doctrines, lightened by cosmic mysticism....with a little sprinkle of organic cacao favoured by Jesus, for decoration.
|
|
|
Post by gadreel on Feb 7, 2018 1:57:27 GMT
So you don't believe he's the only path? Brother what sort of Christian are you exactly? I ask because your views are very unorthodox. IMHO Gad is a high end hipster intelligentsia Agnostic Theist with Christianity on the side with his kale salad of new age ideas and strong deep faith in God coffee. Unorthodoxy is cool as long as it is based on a long held intellectual base of earthy doctrines, lightened by cosmic mysticism....with a little sprinkle of organic cacao favoured by Jesus, for decoration. it's hardly a humble one.
|
|
|
Post by captainbryce on Feb 7, 2018 2:27:32 GMT
Based on the gospel accounts, what is the most reasonable explanation for the life and claims of Jesus? Well if you use circular reasoning, and begin with the premise that the Gospel accounts actually happened in the first place, exactly as recorded in the English translation of the Greek texts, according to the traditional, fundamentalist interpretation of course, with absolutely no supporting evidence whatsoever, and relying solely on the fact that "the bible says so"... ...then there are other possibilities that you are still failing to consider. Taking the story at face value (despite the various contradictions between the synoptic gospels, The Gospel of John, the accounts of Luke, Peter, Timothy, James, and the Pauline writings) Jesus could very well have been none of the above. It is entirely possible that he was merely a revolutionary who sought to affect positive change in the Jewish community by being a superior example of hope and morality that escaped the Pharisees, Sadducees, and commoners within the Jewish community, as well as the Gentile Romans. It's possible that he believed so strongly in a way of life that would ultimately be more prosperous for humanity, that he was willing to die for what he believed in (in the same way that many martyrs in history have done). It is possible that he sought to inspire a following that would champion peace and tolerance, over the war and violence that was so prevalent at the time. And it is also possible that he and his message gave so much hope to people who had little to nothing else, that he ended up being revered as a "god".
|
|
|
Post by lowtacks86 on Feb 7, 2018 2:35:53 GMT
Because the evidence for Jesus is better. That Jesus' enemies not only didnt falsify the miracle claims made about him but were forced to accuse him of performing them by the power of demons The gospels are classified Ancient Greco-Roman biography. "Because the evidence for Jesus is better." Not really, certainly not the version with miracles and divinity at least. Sake of argument lets say that was true, even then so what? There's far better evidence for the existence of Muhammed then Jesus(there's actual legit historical documents for him). That doesn't automatically make him an actual prophet, now does it? "That Jesus' enemies not only didnt falsify the miracle claims made about him but were forced to accuse him of performing them by the power of demons" The enemies of Hercules didn't "falsify" his strength either, again what point are you trying to make? "The gospels are classified Ancient Greco-Roman biography." So what? Hercules was also Greco-Roman mythology. You inserting "biography" at the end doesn't automatically make it true anymore than me putting "biography" next to Merlin.
|
|
|
Post by captainbryce on Feb 7, 2018 2:39:37 GMT
The gospels are classified Ancient Greco-Roman biography. I don't see how that helps your argument. So was ancient Greek mythology (until they abandoned those beliefs for a new one - Christianity). Basically, when the leaders became Christian, and threatened anyone else with DEATH for practicing "pagan" beliefs, that's when beliefs associated with Christianity became "historical" and the "histories" of the ancient Greek gods was redacted.
|
|
|
Post by permutojoe on Feb 7, 2018 2:51:59 GMT
Backwoods Jewish preacher who was stubborn and prideful enough to die for his message.
|
|
|
Post by them1ghtyhumph on Feb 7, 2018 3:02:57 GMT
Based on the gospel accounts, what is the most reasonable explanation for the life and claims of Jesus? How can we possibly know, at this point in time? The only thing we know right now is that many deviant, bigoted, money grubbing totally compassionless lowlife cocksuckers are using his name to promote their agendas, while not following his principles of caring and not hating. Jesus has become a Brand for hate, whichever of the 3 choices he may be.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 7, 2018 3:31:28 GMT
None of those three. More likely another L - Legend.
If I had to bet, a real person with a lot of exaggeration built around him.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 7, 2018 3:45:40 GMT
lowtacks86 I assume you're referring to the reported miracles. Most scholars believe the NT was completed by A.D 80. That's around 50 years after the crucifixion. Firstly, do you think 50 years is a long enough time for such major exaggerations to evolve and stick? Yes. You have to understand that ancient people really didn't have the same view of the world that we do. They took magic and superstition really seriously back then; even educated elites accepted the existence of the supernatural as a matter of obvious fact, and would frequently attribute events to it. I find it extremely easy to believe that such myths could grow up whilst jesus still lived - if indeed he did - let alone half a century later It would be simplicity itself. There was little in the way of fact checking back then, little in the way of reliable records at all. It's not like people would go to a jesus event then come home and post the photos on their facebook. If a story gets made up thirty years later, who could really know for sure which particular event they're talking about, exactly what happened, etc? Hell, you could as easily ask why there are no contemporary accounts confirming any of the miracles. Matthew 27 claims that after the resurrection tombs opened and the dead wandered into town to hang out with the living, witnessed by many. You wouldn't think that this would be something historians of the time would record, if it ever actually happened?
|
|
|
Post by phludowin on Feb 7, 2018 7:56:45 GMT
One choice is missing: Legend.
|
|
|
Post by Cody™ on Feb 7, 2018 8:21:16 GMT
Based on the gospel accounts, what is the most reasonable explanation for the life and claims of Jesus? Well if you use circular reasoning, and begin with the premise that the Gospel accounts actually happened in the first place, exactly as recorded in the English translation of the Greek texts, according to the traditional, fundamentalist interpretation of course, with absolutely no supporting evidence whatsoever, and relying solely on the fact that "the bible says so"... ...then there are other possibilities that you are still failing to consider. Taking the story at face value (despite the various contradictions between the synoptic gospels, The Gospel of John, the accounts of Luke, Peter, Timothy, James, and the Pauline writings) Jesus could very well have been none of the above. It is entirely possible that he was merely a revolutionary who sought to affect positive change in the Jewish community by being a superior example of hope and morality that escaped the Pharisees, Sadducees, and commoners within the Jewish community, as well as the Gentile Romans. It's possible that he believed so strongly in a way of life that would ultimately be more prosperous for humanity, that he was willing to die for what he believed in (in the same way that many martyrs in history have done). It is possible that he sought to inspire a following that would champion peace and tolerance, over the war and violence that was so prevalent at the time. And it is also possible that he and his message gave so much hope to people who had little to nothing else, that he ended up being revered as a "god". How do you square all this with Jesus claims to be the 'Bread of life', that he was the very fulfilment of OT scripture, that he existed before the world began, that he was the only way to get to heaven, that he was without sin, that he and God the Father were one, that if you'd seen him you'd seen God and that if people obeyed his words they would never taste death? And that's before considering all the miracles he reportedly performed i.e. turning water into wine, healing the sick, walking on water and the raising from the dead.
|
|
|
Post by Cody™ on Feb 7, 2018 8:38:28 GMT
Muhammad also believed Jesus was a historical person who performed miracles BTW. Just sayin Walking on water, raising from the dead, healing the sick, casting out demons etc is kinda easier to falsify than someone allegedly having abnormal strength don't you think? And who are these enemies of Hercules and do any of them affirm as legit the powers associated with him? LOL
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Feb 7, 2018 10:53:03 GMT
We have extra-biblical Jewish and Roman accounts confirming Jesus worked 'wonders' and 'signs' only attributing him doing them by the power of demons. Fact: outside of the scriptures (themselves written years after purported events, and the Gospels only attributed authorship by tradition) there are no contemporary accounts of Jesus' miracles - even by leading Jewish writers. The first possible external mention to Jesus is by Flavius Josephus, born around AD38. His Antiquities of the Jews, written around 93–94 AD, includes two references to the biblical Jesus Christ in Books 18 and 20 and a reference to John the Baptist in Book 18. Scholarly opinion varies on the total or partial authenticity of the reference in Book 18, Chapter 3, 3 of the Antiquities, a passage that states that Jesus the Messiah was a wise teacher who was crucified by Pilate, usually called the Testimonium Flavianum. A number of variations exist between the statements by Josephus regarding the deaths of James and John the Baptist and the New Testament accounts. The general scholarly view is that while the Testimonium Flavianum is most likely not authentic in its entirety, it is broadly agreed upon that it originally consisted of an authentic nucleus, which was then subject to Christian interpolation and/or alteration. Given the history of religious fraud and mendacity down the millennia, quelle surprise!
|
|
|
Post by FilmFlaneur on Feb 7, 2018 11:19:46 GMT
Based on the gospel accounts, what is the most reasonable explanation for the life and claims of Jesus? Just a human mystic to whom history (and calculating followers) have added impossible feats based on a purported supernatural reality.
|
|
|
Post by Terrapin Station on Feb 7, 2018 11:36:53 GMT
Jesus: fictional character.
Maybe based on a real person, or persons, but a fictionalized version of that person in any event.
|
|
puvo
Sophomore
@puvo
Posts: 575
Likes: 78
|
Post by puvo on Feb 7, 2018 11:42:31 GMT
Based on the gospel accounts, what is the most reasonable explanation for the life and claims of Jesus? Legend.
|
|
|
Post by Winter_King on Feb 7, 2018 12:18:51 GMT
Based on the gospel accounts: legend.
|
|
|
Post by captainbryce on Feb 7, 2018 15:27:17 GMT
How do you square all this with Jesus claims to be the 'Bread of life', that he was the very fulfilment of OT scripture, that he existed before the world began, that he was the only way to get to heaven, that he was without sin, that he and God the Father were one, that if you'd seen him you'd seen God and that if people obeyed his words they would never taste death? Claims don’t really need to be “squared away” unless they can be proven to be demonstrably true. How do you square away the claims of Muhammad? Or Joseph Smith? Probably the same way conservative Jews square away the claims of Jesus! They just choose not to believe it. David Blaine reportedly turned a $1 bill into a $100 bill, Chriss Angel has reportedly walked on water before, and my aunt’s doctor cured her of cancer! Any sufficiently advanced technology (or rare, not fully understood skill) is indistinguishable from magic. The difference is, in the era of science, we no longer accept supernatural claims at face value. Thousands of years ago people believed that the common cold and flu-like symptoms was the result of demon possessions! Today, when people get proper treatment for such ailments, we don’t say that the person who cured them drove out demons! We understand that it was actually a viral infection.
|
|
|
Post by cupcakes on Feb 7, 2018 16:42:39 GMT
tpfkar As a character, mountebank and/or delusional mammoth narcissist. Historically, a literary tool for promoting gross immorality. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.
|
|