|
Posts:
81
From:
China
Registered:
10/27/09
|
|
(1 of 223)
This is the History Channel, not the Theology Channe!
Oct 27, 2009 11:52 PM
|
I am disappointed to see little but theological ramblings on this forum. Surely there are other websites on which to muse on dogma and faith.
I am extremely interested in the historical Jesus and the history of Christianity, but I see little here that relates to this.
Whilst some historians dispute that Jesus ever existed, I am part of the majority that believes that there was an historical figure relating to the mythical Jesus.
The reason being is that the story of Jesus is just so inconvenient to Christians that it must be true.
Think about it: a bloke who is supposed to be no less than God is executed as a criminal. His prophesies on the Kingdom of Heaven arriving on Earth (said somewhere that it will arrive while some of his disciples are still among the living) does not come to fruition. Things don't really go so well for this Messiah, but no worries, he will come back.
What is more likely true about the historical figure:
1. He was born in Nazareth. It is unlikely that he ever even went further south than Jerusalem. Early Christian writers simply say that he was born in Bethlehem as the book of Isiah prophesises that this is the location of the Messiah's birth.
2. There are no historical records of any substance extant up until he is around the age of 30. The story of him lecturing in the temple are clear fabrications. The thought of Jewish elders listening and grovelling to a Jewish boy who comes up with a fairly mundane lecture on the nature of heaven sounds nothing like the ring of historicity.
3. John the Baptist has more historical weight than that of Jesus. He is mentioned in sources outside the bible such as Josephus' Antiquities. While Jesus is also mentioned in the same volume, virtually all serious academics disregard it as a fabrication.
4. Jesus was likely a disciple of John's. Subsequently, he likely either took over the Baptist cult or led a breakaway sect.
5. Jesus and his followers likely thought of him as the Messiah, but never God or the Only Son of God or the Third Part of the Trinity. This would have been the height of blasphemy in the Jewish faith. The Messiah, according to the Jewish faith, was never to be any more than a mortal man.
6. Jesus likely did believe that he was going to bring about a great change by travelling to Jerusalem where he would be proclaimed Messiah. He was probably displaying grandiosity and was obsessed with matters of religion. Two symptoms of schizophrenoform psychological conditions.
7. This did not happen. The people of Jerusalem were used to wannabe Messiahs turning up. Clearly they largely dismissed him.
8. Jesus was upset by this and resultant, had a temper tantrum in the temple, overturning tables and verbally abusing money changers.
9. For this reason he was quickly arrested and executed. There was no meeting with Pilate or Herod; he just wasn't all that important. There was no prayers in Gesthemane. His entourage could not, or would not, help him.
10. There was no resurrection. No miracles. No temple cracking in two. There will be no second coming. We are not in the parousia. He will not be there to judge the living and the dead. These beliefs have nothing to do with evidence, they are simply stances of faith.
My apologies for not cross referencing what I have said here, but I am prepared to do so if challenged.
You may take umbrage to what I have written here. This may be perceived as an attack on faith. My answer to this would be simply that you are on the wrong web site. This is a history website. Not a theology website. I myself would never visit a theological website and air my views there.
I do believe in God, but my understanding of such a being is far more sophisticated and expansive than a those who believe that God can be understood through the person of a First Century Jewish builder.
|
|
|
Posts:
11,840
Registered:
5/12/04
|
|
(2 of 223)
Re: This is the History Channel, not the Theology Channe!
Oct 28, 2009 12:13 AM
|
> I am extremely interested in the historical Jesus and
> the history of Christianity, but I see little here
> that relates to this.
Me too, but I see little in this post that relates to this.
> My apologies for not cross referencing what I have
> said here, but I am prepared to do so if challenged.
OK, I challenge you to "cross reference" what you have said in items 2, 6, and 9, because what is more likely about the poster, is that you are just making this crap up.
--
"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe." - Albert Einstein
|
|
|
Posts:
81
From:
China
Registered:
10/27/09
|
|
(3 of 223)
Re: This is the History Channel, not the Theology Channe!
Oct 28, 2009 12:48 AM
|
Don't really know what you mean by your first sentence. Please be more succinct.
2. As I said, there are no real historical records. So I cannot cross reference them. Luke 2:41-52 when found in the temple: "'Why were you searching for me?’ he asked, ‘Didn’t you know I had to be in my Father's house?'" Is unlikely historical.
6.
Luke 10:13-15 'These are bad times for you, inhabitants of Chorazin! These are bad times for you, inhabitants of Bethsaida! I showed you many *miracles. If the people of Tyre and Sidon had seen *miracles like that, they would have *repented long ago. They would have shown how sorry they were. They would have worn rough clothes and put ashes on their heads. [These were signs that people were very sad. Tyre and Sidon were very wicked cities.] But it will be better for Tyre and Sidon at the *judgement than for you. And you, people of Capernaum, what will happen to you? Will God be pleased with you? No, he will punish you.'
Sounds fairly grandiose to me. There are many such examples. "Wo to you scribes and pharisees." It seems to be woe to anyone who does not accept him as the Messiah.
Luke9:27: I tell you the truth, some who are standing here will not taste death before they see the kingdom of God."
Sounds as if he thought the Kingdom of Heaven (whatever that is) will be coming sooner rather than later. Even though I beileve that he thought it would culminate on his arrival in Jerusalem.
9. Jesus was arrested and executed. No-one disagrees with that except for the Muslims. The temple would have been heavily guarded by Roman soldiers in the first century. That someone could turn up and create any sort of disturbance of the peace there and not be swiftly and brutally punished beggars belief.
The massive problem with the historicity of accounts such as the prayer at Gesthemene and the chat with Pilate is that the narrator writes himself out of the story! (gasp!) That's right: there are no witnesses to Jesus' prayers according to the writer himself! There are no witnesses to his exchange with Pilate (other than Pilate) according to the writer himself. None of his potential biographers accompany him to see Herod either.
These accounts are clearly fabricated. It is far more likely that the crime he was executed for was disturbing the peace in the temple.
No, I am not making this stuff up. I am a professional history teacher. I really don't know what you fundamentalists are even doing on this website when you have no concern whatsoever for real historical critical analysis.
|
|
|
Posts:
10,510
Registered:
12/22/05
|
|
(4 of 223)
Re: This is the History Channel, not the Theology Channe!
Oct 28, 2009 2:40 AM
|
OK, I challenge you to "cross reference" what you have said in items 2, 6, and 9, because what is more likely about the poster, is that you are just making this crap up.
I'll bet he thinks we have never seen a fundamentalist atheist before.
--
“Get your facts straight first, then you can distort them as you please.” - Mark Twain
|
|
|
Posts:
81
From:
China
Registered:
10/27/09
|
|
(5 of 223)
Re: This is the History Channel, not the Theology Channe!
Oct 28, 2009 3:59 AM
|
As I have said, I am not an atheist.
While I reject any notion that Jesus was, in any way shape or form, anything more than a normal human being such as myself or anyone else on this forum, I actually do believe in God.
I am in fact a pantheist. What I am saying is that such topics as religious beliefs do not belong on a history forum.
|
|
|
Posts:
10,794
Registered:
1/18/06
|
|
(6 of 223)
Re: This is the History Channel, not the Theology Channe!
Oct 28, 2009 4:23 AM
|
> I am in fact a pantheist. What I am saying is that
> such topics as religious beliefs do not belong on a
> history forum.
Good luck getting them off.
The trade-off you will have to make is to live with them or post somewhere else. It's not like any of us have ever had any success talking to moderators.
--
Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge - Charles Darwin
|
|
|
Posts:
2,506
From:
South Carolina
Registered:
9/28/08
|
|
(7 of 223)
Re: This is the History Channel, not the Theology Channe!
Oct 28, 2009 4:30 AM
|
|
I suppose China is not trying to take over the world through underhanded economic methods of devaluation either.
|
|
|
Posts:
3,469
From:
Orlando, Florida
Registered:
1/18/09
|
|
(8 of 223)
Re: This is the History Channel, not the Theology Channe!
Oct 28, 2009 4:44 AM
|
And so, whilst criticizing others for posting their beliefs on this forum as apposed to historical facts, you then proceed to post your beliefs as well. Very fine, Tanqchao. You will feel very welcome and fit right in, I suppose.
By the way, welcome.
--
You will know the truth, and the truth will set you free. -JOHN 8:32.
|
|
|
Posts:
3,469
From:
Orlando, Florida
Registered:
1/18/09
|
|
(9 of 223)
Re: This is the History Channel, not the Theology Channe!
Oct 28, 2009 4:46 AM
|
As I have said, I am not an atheist.
While I reject any notion that Jesus was, in any way shape or form, anything more than a normal human being such as myself or anyone else on this forum, I actually do believe in God.
I am in fact a pantheist. What I am saying is that such topics as religious beliefs do not belong on a history forum.
The history of Christianity is manifest in the observing of the evolution (or de-evolution if you prefer) of its belief system, Tanq.
--
You will know the truth, and the truth will set you free. -JOHN 8:32.
|
|
|
Posts:
81
From:
China
Registered:
10/27/09
|
|
(10 of 223)
Re: This is the History Channel, not the Theology Channe!
Oct 28, 2009 4:54 AM
|
- Sorry, don't know how to quote -
Feel as though I had to qualify my religious beliefs here as that seems to be the overtone of this forum. Of course, that didn't help as I was accused of being an atheist almost instantaneously.
Where else can I post? I was pretty excited seeing this forum. There must be a forum in which one can post about religious history exclusively.
|
|
|
Posts:
81
From:
China
Registered:
10/27/09
|
|
(11 of 223)
Re: This is the History Channel, not the Theology Channe!
Oct 28, 2009 4:57 AM
|
The history of Christianity is manifest in the observing of the evolution (or de-evolution if you prefer) of its belief system, Tanq.
Fair point, but I see little of this happening either.
As for the somewhat irrelevant comment about China, I am not Chinese, I just live here.
|
|
|
Posts:
3,469
From:
Orlando, Florida
Registered:
1/18/09
|
|
(12 of 223)
Re: This is the History Channel, not the Theology Channe!
Oct 28, 2009 5:16 AM
|
Fair point, but I see little of this happening either.
As for the somewhat irrelevant comment about China, I am not Chinese, I just live here.
I agree. I first joined this forum with the thought of asking a question about a certain program, but this was all that was provided.
It is very difficult to keep a discussion on subject here as well. Have you tried the 'Other Religions" board on this same website?
Mostly it seems that many of the individuals that spend much time on these sites have a rather narrow view and plenty of time on their hands.
If you find a board that discusses histoical 'fact' without as much name-calling, let me know, please.
--
You will know the truth, and the truth will set you free. -JOHN 8:32.
|
|
|
Posts:
11,840
Registered:
5/12/04
|
|
(13 of 223)
Re: This is the History Channel, not the Theology Channe!
Oct 28, 2009 6:05 AM
|
> OK, I challenge you to "cross reference" what you
> have said in items 2, 6, and 9, because what is more
> likely about the poster, is that you are just making
> this crap up.
>
> I'll bet he thinks we have never seen a
> fundamentalist atheist before.
LOL, yeah, he probably thinks he's the first one to invent credentials and pretend he's only here to talk about history too. 
If he really is a new poster.
--
"Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I'm not sure about the universe." - Albert Einstein
|
|
|
Posts:
10,510
Registered:
12/22/05
|
|
(14 of 223)
Re: This is the History Channel, not the Theology Channe!
Oct 28, 2009 6:16 AM
|
If he really is a new poster.
I was wondering about that myself.
--
“Get your facts straight first, then you can distort them as you please.” - Mark Twain
|
|
|
Posts:
699
Registered:
3/5/00
|
|
(15 of 223)
Re: This is the History Channel, not the Theology Channe!
Oct 28, 2009 7:43 AM
|
> While I reject any notion that Jesus was, in any way
> shape or form, anything more than a normal human
> being such as myself or anyone else on this forum,
Normal human being? I recommend you read a book by CS Lewis called "Mere Christianity".
An excerpt from that book:
"A man who was merely a man and said the sort of things Jesus said would not be a great moral teacher. He would either be a lunatic - on the level with a man who says he is a poached egg - or he would be the devil of hell. You must take your choice. Either this was, and is, the Son of God, or else a madman or something worse. You can shut Him up for a fool or you can fall at His feet and call Him Lord and God. But let us not come with any patronizing nonsense about His being a great human teacher. He has not left that open to us."
That's all I wanted to add to the discourse. Have a good day.
.
--
"Art, like morality, consists in drawing the line somewhere."
G. K. Chesterton
|
|
|
|
|
