Agnostic.com

4 2

I got criticized for assuming that Christ really existed. Point well taken, none of the historians at the time even mention our Lamb of God except for a Jewish writer, Josephus, a couple of decades later. You would think our Redeemer would at least have made a few headlines in the papers. (There were newspapers, Julius Caesar was the first editor in history, The Daily Forum, 50 years before our Lord.)

Regardless of whether he existed or not, Christianity's effects on human history are indelible. My analogy remains sound: Christ was like a dog trying to figure out the nature of the universe with his nose. He was like my cat watching me play chess and wondering what it was all about. Christ had no inkling of the immensity of the universe, the Big Bang, evolution or even genetics.

Yet this Biblical nonsense has been the dominant guide to morality for two thousand years. No wonder the world is so screwed up!

Aristippus 6 May 15
Share

Enjoy being online again!

Welcome to the community of good people who base their values on evidence and appreciate civil discourse - the social network you will enjoy.

Create your free account

4 comments

Feel free to reply to any comment by clicking the "Reply" button.

0

“Christ had no inkling of the immensity of the universe, the Big Bang, evolution or even genetics.

Yet this Biblical nonsense has been the dominant guide to morality for two thousand years. No wonder the world is so screwed up!”

All of our highly vaunted scientific knowledge amounts to very little in the face of the profoundly staggering implications of reality. I don’t see how you can make those negative judgments about people who lived long before the age of science. Compare with the Buddha. He had no knowledge of modern science, yet his teachings seem to have helped many people to live good lives.

If you want to analyze everything scientifically, include the emergence of religions in your analysis. Religions arose for reasons and are just as much a part of nature as the Big Bang.

1

What does the Big Bang have to do with morality?

skado Level 9 May 15, 2020

If Jesus were aware of Big Bang theory, he probably wouldn't believe in "Let there be light" as the moment of creation. The fact that the world wan't created by an act of the will of God changes everything. We wouldn't be divorced from the animal world and our morality would be totally different.

@Aristippus
If Jesus, or whoever wrote those stories, had been speaking figuratively, instead of literally, in order to communicate in terms a mostly non-literate, pre-Enlightenment population could understand... then "Let there be light" could plausibly be interpreted as "Big Bang", and who knows how people two thousand years from now will interpret Big Bang in light of the possible advances in science between now and then. "The phrase "Big Bang" might look embarrassingly quaint by then. Just think of the advances we've made in the last 400 years - practically the whole of what we call science today. 2,000 years? Wow. That's several magnitudes of metamorphosis of understanding. The mindset would likely be unrecognizable from our current perspective, as no doubt, ours would have been to Jesus' contemporaries.

The truth is, we are to some undeniable degree (not totally of course, and not even mostly, but to a greater degree than any other animal) divorced from the animal world. It happened when we invented agriculture, and then civilization. We changed our environment to such a severe degree that we would not have survived as a species if not for the concomitant cultural counterbalance, the central feature of which was religion. Post-Enlightenment Homo sapiens has fallen in love with the deadly, and quite paradoxical notion that, on the one hand, no gods exist, and on the other, that we, ourselves, are gods - beholden to no one or no thing other than the unbridled pursuit of pleasure and consumption. And that we, ourselves, are all-knowing and all-wise.

Were we ever to allow humility to intrude upon our narcissistic dream, we might wonder how much worse things could now be, if we had never tried to devise a code of civilized behavior.

2

I have no idea if Jesus of the Bible really existed. Somebody wrote those words that he is alleged to have said, and some of those words are very astute IMO. I don’t much care who wrote them or said them. For any words to be useful they have to be taken in and digested until they resonate on a deep level.

There seems to be no verifiable historical references to Jesus, but that proves nothing. It is interesting that nothing was written about the Buddha until a couple hundred years after his death, yet his existence is not questioned. His teachings were passed down orally, generation after generation as was the practice in that day.

I'm not saying that the absence of coroborating evidence "proves' anything. It's merely a consideration that should be taken into account.

How about Christ's line "The meek will inherit the Earth." That's one of the wrongest statements in all history. Tell that to the Jews marching into the ovens in Auschwitz.

Here's one equally as ludacrous: A record company executive told Elvis Presley to go back to Mississippi and drive a truck.

@Aristippus I don’t necessarily agree with the entire thing. Some I just don’t understand and some I disagree with, such as the theory of hell.

Overall Jesus seems like a pretty good old boy. I don’t much cotton to that part about stealing a donkey to ride into Jerusalem so that prophecy would be fulfilled, however I try not to be judgmental.

Being meek sort of mirrors the Tao. I’m not entirely sure about that part. Maybe enough time hasn’t lapsed for that to happen.

I hadn’t heard that about Elvis. I’m glad he didn’t listen. I’m only now learning to appreciate his great voice.

@Aristippus

"How about Christ's line "The meek will inherit the Earth."

Here's how it could happen...

@Aristippus The EuropeanJews as a people at that time were non-violent but strong in spirit. The survivors among them did go on to inherit at least a part of the earth, and have excelled broadly. The Nazi leaders came to ruin.

The story is repeated with MLK and his non-violent approach. I wonder if “meek” is the best translation for modern times.

@skado I read about this study a few years ago. I thought it was very informative and important. In the part I studied the new society was much more accepting of "aliens" that wandered into the group.

To tell the truth I detest our corrupt "leaders" that live off the working class like parasites. What do they contribute, what do they create or manufacture?

Interesting fact: President Trump mimics the baboon emperor, according to Desmnd Morris in the Human Zoo. The emperor has an immediate clique, god-like status, always lives on the loftiest spot on the hill, and has a long lustrous mane. Take a look at the president's yellow hair.

@WilliamFleming I'm heavily into Dawkins; Selfish Gene theory. So to me "meek" means dove as opposed to hawk which says stay and fight. Christ's statement demonstrates how ignorant he was of the laws of nature. If the hawk gene gets too strong, the carriers will kill one another in battle over the female. If the dove gets too strong, any hawk can come along and simply pust the dove aside and simply take the female.

The two genes can only exist in an equilibrium which Dawkins estimates to be about 5/8 dove, but this is constantly fluctuating as environmental conditions change. The concept that the "meek will inherit the Earth" is silly and ignorant.

@Aristippus I get your point but I’m not convinced that societal behavior can be reduced to that one simple model. There are many other factors involved, and above all, we can consciously override genetic disposition and change our behavior. Dawkins tends to think in mechanistic terms.

I agree that a certain degree of hawkishness is natural and probably necessary.

@WilliamFleming Check out my next post in answer to this, ok?

1

Historical Jesus has the benefit of scholarly consensus (scholars of history, an inexact disipline, especially with such ancient sources). Myhticists on the other hand have the benefit of skepticism. As a skeptic, my bottom line is that even if Christianity had a discrete founder, the fabulist narratives of the gospels can't possibly describe him accurately or reliably. People who read tea leaves in the gospels and the rest of the NT to tease out the "real" Jesus really don't have enough data to go on.

Write Comment
You can include a link to this post in your posts and comments by including the text q:496175
Agnostic does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any content. Read full disclaimer.