To Non-Christians: What are your thoughts on Jesus and Early Christianity?

[psychoslice]

I see, so what was this apparent appearance of apostles, followers witnesses all around the same time in the first century (including their executions by the state)? Who wove this together and why?

There was all sorts of stuff happening back then, but Christianity as we know it today was cultured at that time, it came much later with Constantine around 327 ad. There was many scriptures at that time, and after Constantine ordered a book to be put together using the best of all the scriptures, so they argued over what should be in the book and what should not be in the book, and hence the so called bible.

 

[Twilight Hue]

This is asking what do you think really happened (as opposed to just what you don't believe).

I mean opinions like Jesus never existed; existed but got distorted; existed but a fraud/hoaxer; had miraculous events; had no miraculous events, not enough information to judge, etcetera.

Also what are your thoughts on the earliest Christians including the apostles and eyewitnesses like St. Peter? Hoaxed? Hoaxers? Errant well-meaning? Got it right to the best of their abilities? Under the influence of a charismatic leader? What?

I used to believe Jesus existed. A lot of things just didn't fit anymore. The entire mythos including many characters and figures remains extremely. vauge and unsubstantiated to where I just chalked it up among the ancient figures, gods, and goddesses of a past ancient and bygone era.

 

[Augustus]

This is asking what do you think really happened (as opposed to just what you don't believe).

I mean opinions like Jesus never existed; existed but got distorted; existed but a fraud/hoaxer; had miraculous events; had no miraculous events, not enough information to judge, etcetera.

Also what are your thoughts on the earliest Christians including the apostles and eyewitnesses like St. Peter? Hoaxed? Hoaxers? Errant well-meaning? Got it right to the best of their abilities? Under the influence of a charismatic leader? What?

Jesus existed, and was probably a Jewish eschatological preacher with some degree of following, but nothing remarkable. At the time of his life, he was just one of many preachers/prophets and probably didn't stand out much from his contemporaries at the time. After his death at the hands of the Romans, his followers kept on spreading his message and, over time, constructed hagiographies about him. The miracles were likely a later addition to these hagiographies, probably based on real events that had become mythologised and exaggerated in the retelling.

As to how much can be said about his followers, it is very hard to throw away a 21st C mindset and think like a 1st C Palestinian. They were probably genuine in their beliefs, Paul might well have thought that he had been 'visited' by Jesus for example.

Christianity is probably a fair bit different from Jesus' actual message and has a greater debt to Paul, but I don't buy into the idea that it was a cynical invention by powerful people, this idea is highly implausible.

 

[Akivah]

My opinion is that jesus never actually existed. It is a fictional character created by Emperor Constantine as a means of unifying his state. The character is an amalgamation from both some pre-existing cults (such as Bacchus and Mithras) and Judaism.

 

[Augustus]

My opinion is that jesus never actually existed. It is a fictional character created by Emperor Constantine as a means of unifying his state. The character is an amalgamation from both some pre-existing cults (such as Bacchus and Mithras) and Judaism.

Christianity as a 3rd Century top down construct is both ahistorical, and vastly overinflates the power and influence of the ruler. To simply create a religion out of thin air and quickly impose it on the population without any existing support is fantastical.

 

[George-ananda]

I used to believe Jesus existed.

What about all the first century Christians and apostles??

 

[George-ananda]

My opinion is that jesus never actually existed. It is a fictional character created by Emperor Constantine as a means of unifying his state. The character is an amalgamation from both some pre-existing cults (such as Bacchus and Mithras) and Judaism.

You mean all the things scholars tell us about the first and second centuries never happened???

 

[Straw Dog]

This is asking what do you think really happened (as opposed to just what you don't believe).

I mean opinions like Jesus never existed; existed but got distorted; existed but a fraud/hoaxer; had miraculous events; had no miraculous events, not enough information to judge, etcetera.

Also what are your thoughts on the earliest Christians including the apostles and eyewitnesses like St. Peter? Hoaxed? Hoaxers? Errant well-meaning? Got it right to the best of their abilities? Under the influence of a charismatic leader? What?

Don't know. I don't live in the past.

 

[George-ananda]

The miracles were likely a later addition to these hagiographies, probably based on real events that had become mythologised and exaggerated in the retelling.

But what about first century sources like the apostles and St. Peter and other eyewitnesses. The resurrection claims go back to the very earliest extant writings about Christianity for example.

 

[George-ananda]

I used to believe Jesus existed. A lot of things just didn't fit anymore. The entire mythos including many characters and figures remains extremely. vauge and unsubstantiated to where I just chalked it up among the ancient figures, gods, and goddesses of a past ancient and bygone era.

The consensus among the scholars who study these things generally believe Jesus was a historical figure. And what about the first century figures and writings (like St. Peter, etc.). I find the Jesus didn't exist view extremely hard to believe.

 

[Jumi]

I mean opinions like Jesus never existed; existed but got distorted; existed but a fraud/hoaxer; had miraculous events; had no miraculous events, not enough information to judge, etcetera.

I'm not sure if he existed, for me it isn't important if he did or not - but the message seems to have been distorted or altered as the religion built on him became established.

Also what are your thoughts on the earliest Christians including the apostles and eyewitnesses like St. Peter? Hoaxed? Hoaxers? Errant well-meaning? Got it right to the best of their abilities? Under the influence of a charismatic leader? What?

I certainly don't think the miracles happened, and I'm quite unsure if the authors were "eyewitnesses" of Jesus at all.

 

[Augustus]

But what about first century sources like the apostles and St. Peter and other eyewitnesses. The resurrection claims go back to the very earliest extant writings about Christianity for example.

I read about a study once. It related to people belonging to modern apocalyptic cults, you know the type 'the world will end on December 12 2013' type cults.What the study found was that the fact that the world didn't actually end didn't damage the members' faith in the cult, it often made them stronger.

If you are emotionally invested in something, your mind needs to react to the cognitive dissonance of being 'wrong', which can be done by either admitting you were wrong, or by reimagining the situation in a way that makes you 'not wrong'.

Jesus' resurrection could have been a response to this. Perhaps it was a metaphor that gained a real world backstory over time. Perhaps an apostle had a vision/dream that lead to the tale.

This is just speculation, but it is at leat possible that his death had to be explained away to remove cognitive dissonance and that this was a result of it.

The other miracles, healing the sick, feeding the masses, etc. are pretty par for the course and have been applied to many figures. If you watch modern faith healers you see that they have 'miraculous' powers from god. Most of us know better now, but back then an illiterate peasant is unlikely to have been well versed in sceptical thinking.

Many stories probably do have a basis in reality but they just became embellished over time, even over a short time scale. We can see this in regard to all kinds of historical figures, Jesus is unlikely to have been the one person in ancient history whose followers really told it exactly like it happened.

 

[Tarheeler]

I don't doubt that Jesus existed, although I don't think that he was anything like what is described in the Christian Bible.

I believe was a preacher and the leader of a doomsday cult. I believe that when he died and the end of world didn't come his followers latched onto the idea that he couldn't really be dead and that all of his prophecies would still come true. Over time, and with the integration of Roman and other pagan religious ideas, the basic tenets of Christianity were born.

 

[wizanda]

This is asking what do you think really happened (as opposed to just what you don't believe).

Yeshua came to fulfill prophecy; yet not as explained by the later corrupt church..... There are loads of additions in the text to make it sound like other mythologies.... Yet within the middle of it all, is a simple narrative that is prophesied in multiple places, tying the Bible together like a tapestry across time.

The early church was split from the beginning, the true follows of Yeshua were the Ebionites (the poor ones), these believed the commandments could allow them to ascend into heaven, and refused the idea of sacrifice. So the idea of Yeshua being a human sacrifice they stood against, read somewhere that James the Just was part of them, and stood against Paul's and Simon's Christianity.

What he did and whom he was his hard to define, especially when the gospel of John is made up, and sounds nothing like him within the synoptic gospels. The Christian Church is mainly established on all the false bits; thus the true prophetic nature, and mission of Yeshua is sadly purposely covered up (yet fulfilling prophecy in the process).

Some miracles are easily explained, the disciples were also healing with the holy cannabis anointing oil (Mark 6:13 + James 5:14).

 

[Akivah]

You mean all the things scholars tell us about the first and second centuries never happened???

You're saying that jesus existed throughout the first and second centuries?

 

[Akivah]

Christianity as a 3rd Century top down construct is both ahistorical, and vastly overinflates the power and influence of the ruler. To simply create a religion out of thin air and quickly impose it on the population without any existing support is fantastical.

I said the fiction was based on actual religions that had existed or were existing. That is not out of "thin air" and "no support".

 

[Princeps Eugenius]

This is asking what do you think really happened (as opposed to just what you don't believe).

I mean opinions like Jesus never existed; existed but got distorted; existed but a fraud/hoaxer; had miraculous events; had no miraculous events, not enough information to judge, etcetera.

Also what are your thoughts on the earliest Christians including the apostles and eyewitnesses like St. Peter? Hoaxed? Hoaxers? Errant well-meaning? Got it right to the best of their abilities? Under the influence of a charismatic leader? What?

I think Jesus existed but that he wasnt really special and had copyed alot of the pagan beliefs of his time and behaved as though he was the messiah at the end of his life before he got killed for making political unrest.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

My opinion is that jesus never actually existed. It is a fictional character created by Emperor Constantine as a means of unifying his state.

Let's see now: Constantine the Great (272CE - 337CE) created the Jesus of the Epistles and Gospels, all predating the end of the 2nd century CE.

That Constantine was quite a fellow!

The character is an amalgamation from both some pre-existing cults (such as Bacchus and Mithras) and Judaism.

Tired old rubbish.

 

[Angel1]

I'll go first as a non-Christian myself.

I think Jesus was a highly advanced soul that came to earth with a mission to teach. He likely performed miracles and made post-mortem appearances to His disciples. He studied in the Himalayan region during His 'missing years' and probably had deeper knowledge than the masses could rightly grasp but probably held deeper teachings with a select few. I think the early Church was lead by well-meaning (but not inerrant) followers who were galvanized by experiences of love and the miraculous.

I am not Christian but pro- sensible Christianity. I think deeper and more satisfying teachings exist in the eastern/Indian tradition and those are the teachings I identify with.

Because Christ was and is, as you say, highly advanced, his spiritual faculties were likewise highly developed over many lifetimes. To call the attention of the people and get his message received most effectively, he made use of them. But the powers – the power of thought or telekinesis, the power to heal, walking on water or levitation, clairvoyance and telepathy and even the power to bring the dead back to life all operate under divine or universal laws, the principles of which are to most all of us, still to be taught or learned. Nevertheless, he tells us, “All that I have done, you, too, can do. And all that I am, you, too, will be.”

Like anyone who is planning to undertake any project, he conducted a thorough research to ensure his success. He traveled everywhere to learn and orient himself to the existing situations and circumstances, the beliefs of the time, in order to more effectively plan his moves, just like any general will send out scouts to gather intelligence before he commits his whole army. In teaching new things, we begin where the students are presently situated and work forward from there. Otherwise, the disconnect would be too great and the student would soon lose interest or be lost, not able to follow the train of thoughts.

You mentioned deeper and more satisfying teachings that exist in the eastern/Indian tradition. Can you please cite them and provide a brief description of each of them for us?

 

[Augustus]

said the fiction was based on actual religions that had existed or were existing. That is not out of "thin air" and "no support".

"Right chaps, you know you used to worship Dionysus, well actually he's now a Jew called Jesus, and everything about him is different apart from he does stuff with wine. He has all of these new stories that relate to Judaism and sex is taboo now. There's a book about him called the Bible, I'm surprised you haven't heard of it. You worship him now anyway, actually not just him, there is a trinity, but you knew that anyway didn't you? I'd really appreciate it if you could just start calling him Jesus though as I need to unify my state under my new made up religion. That's lovely, I really appreciate your help. There's a good sport."