Agnostic.com

11 13

I’m on the fence about whether or not a person named Jesus existed 2000 years ago. But my understanding of his personality is that he preached love, respect, tolerance, and charity.

Maybe the name is used to describe all people who live in this way. That would leave out a whole lot of devout Christians

HelenRoseBuck 6 Aug 1
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

11 comments

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

0

And perhaps no one is further from god, than those who like to make him in their own image.

1

Love, respect, tolerance, charity...
and redemption.

skado Level 9 Aug 1, 2021
4

Based on a lot of study I'm convinced he was a Jewish anti Roman rebel leader from Egypt that lives some 20 or more years after the historical fiction had him executed in 33ad and turned him into the Messiah.
Flavius Josephus referred to him as the Egyptian in his book "Jewish War" saying "There was an Egyptian false prophet that did the Jews more mischief than the former; for he was a cheat, and pretended to be a prophet also, and got together thirty thousand men that were deluded by him; these he led round about from the wilderness to the mount which was called the Mount of Olives. He was ready to break into Jerusalem by force from that place; and if he could but once conquer the Roman garrison and the people, he intended to rule them by the assistance of those guards of his that were to break into the city with him."
There's a lot more about him but he was in part why Rome destroyed the Temple in 70 ad.
In the Bibles book of Acts the commander (chiliarch) of the Roman garrison in Jerusalem, Claudius Lysias, mistakes Paul for this Egyptian, saying "Aren’t you the Egyptian who started a revolt and led four thousand terrorists out into the wilderness some time ago?"
The fictional Gospels seem to be about white washing his story by moving him back in time but the time line is a complete mess with no two Gospels agreeing on any relevant historical points, although the one about the family fleeing to Egypt after the male children of Israel were killed (which never happened) is sort of telling.
It's like writing a novel about Trump becoming president in 1940 and how he won WWII.
Not an unheard of thing considering in the movie Watchmen we see Nixon as president long after he resigned after he used Doctor Manhattan to win the Vietnam war.

Thanks for your detailed explanation.

0

If such a person existed he probably told everyone that you do not have follow anyone. Such a statement would have been considered blasphemy in his time and a threat to the priestly hierarchy.

I think that was actually Brian. And then people followed him anyway, so.... sod it, people are sheep.

0

Jesus (if he existed at all) was a Jew, he lived his life a Jew, he instructed in the Jewish traditions and he died a Jew. If he preached love, respect, tolerance and charity, it was for the Jews only. Nothing of the Jewish religion and the covenant between Yahweh and the Hebrew people has anything to do with Gentiles. My opinion.

What separates Jews from Gentiles is whether they believe in one God or several. The O.T is a prophecy about one man rescuing Jews from Roman rule and it was Romans who carried forth the idea of Jesus, not the Jewish society Romans held political control over, and Jews saw no evidence that Jesus had rescued them. Therefore he was not their Messiah. Constantine made the claim, 1,000 years later, that Jesus rescued them by removing blood sacrifices to God (making them=to Romans). I think that’s why he made Constantinople his Capital over Rome. It was closer to the Jews but, of course, it didn’t really work. His message was clearly to give Caesar his taxes but maintain God as one’s compass. Constantine worshipped only one God so had good reason to suspect he could unite the Middle Eastern kingdom under the idea that Jesus did free them after his death. Jews, of course, don’t buy this (although the blood sacrifices stopped when The Temple came down).

I don’t think it’s important whether Jesus actually lived or not. Whether he was of Jewish or Roman decent. What’s important is what message is ascribed to him. For that we really only have The Sermon On The Mount and that is far softer, more humanistic, than the messages of God in Jewish history. God proved Thou’s existence to man many times in order to achieve such worship. The idea that Thou can’t do so now, because it denies faith, is therefore absurd. It was a tale for a different age which lost relevance when Rome fell.

Want peace in the M.E.? Tear down the mosque now on that site, rebuild The Temple as it was, but declare the new building to have the unifying spiritual connotations currently ascribed to The Church of the Holy Sepulchre. A site used for worship by Judaism, Catholicism, Christianity, and Islam. The four wings of the building could each be devoted to a religion but Jews would be required to practice blood sacrifices as God instructed. That ought to shut them up about The Temple’s great importance.

But I digress. Jesus may have been more of an hysterical personage (much like Trump) than an historical one. Either way he holds an importance that can not be swept aside so we should, IMO, go with it. If the point of Atheism is to increase humanistic efforts then The Beatitudes favor Atheistic goals so I no longer see the point in not using them. Let’s start using our tools rather than making unprovable claims which prolong divisions and lose their usefulness.

There’s not much time left for this idea. We can change on a dime, or not, but the way to settle it is not (in my opinion) to keep arguing about it. Find the useful ground and go with it or let ego (the attempt to be right) prevail.

2

Jesus is a Greek rendering of a very common name at the time. He was so important as a child that Eastern men brought him gifts of gold, frankenstein, and myrrh. The most important of these is frankenstein. The entire story and all the writings in the book are a Frankenstein. This was sold to us some 300 years past his supposed existence. This is why I give it very little thought today.

I’ll continue to open my mind to truths no matter the source. Thanks for expressing your view.

3

I think you are exactly right about this. It doesn't matter whether a particular historical person spoke wisdom or not. What matters is the wisdom spoken. A corollary to the sign in the photo is, Christians who practice genuine compassion toward others and restraint of their own destructive instincts are closer to the scientific truth than scientism-thumping, absolutist atheists who categorically despise anything related to "religion" just because it offends their identity.

skado Level 9 Aug 1, 2021
0

Let's go to Clackmas!

1

That depends on whether the weather was good in Jesus's days or whether the weather was bad...

Some people just can't weather typos, whether or not the typo renders the meaning ambiguous…

Lol! I missed that. Thanks for pointing it out. I’ll be sure to change it. However, please know that I’m not perfect and may have future errors.

0

LMAO!

3

I think it was just personifying some Eastern philosophy onto the prevalent thought.

One of the Jesus origin story myths even mentions Eastern Kings.

Write Comment
You can include a link to this post in your posts and comments by including the text q:613045
Agnostic does not evaluate or guarantee the accuracy of any content. Read full disclaimer.