A
angellous_evangellous
Guest
O Effendi, whose intelligence is like the rising of the Sun upon the frozen wasteland of my ignorance - yeah, I like that one.
That works, but just "Effendi" will work.
A rose by any other name.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
To The Jesus Myth Theorist
- Thread starter CynthiaCypher
- Start date
That works, but just "Effendi" will work.
A rose by any other name.
Sayi Nazir
Member
Personal resources (i.e. anecdotes and heresay) are usually unacceptable as evidence; but, yes, I have known many people who claim that Jesus was an Essene despite evidence to the contrary.
A
angellous_evangellous
Guest
CynthiaCypher
Well-Known Member
More like "Efreeti" if you ask me.
A
angellous_evangellous
Guest
:takeabow:
michaelsherlock
Member
The following is the beginning of a long list of scholars that in one or another promote the concept of the "christ myth!"
Here are 8 scholars to start with.
Sources for Christ Conspiracy
1. John E. Remsburg.
Credentials:
· Teacher and Lecturer on Free-thought, Author
Most relevant Books:
· The Christ
· The Sabbath Breakers
2. Joseph Wheless
Credentials:
· Lawyer who legally defended many Atheistic Organizations against the Churches, Author.
Most relevant Books:
· Is it Gods Word?
· Forgery in Christianity
3. Eric H. Cline
Credentials:
· Author, historian, archaeologist, and professor of ancient history and archaeology at The George Washington University in Washington DC, where he is Associate Professor and Chair of the Department of Classical and Near Eastern Languages and Civilizations, as well as Director of the GWU Capitol Archaeological Institute. He is also the advisor for the undergraduate archaeology majors, for which he was awarded the GWU Award for "Excellence in Undergraduate Departmental Advising" (2006).
Most relevant Book:
· Biblical Archaeology: A Very Short Introduction.
4. Robert M. Price
Credentials:
Theologian and Author. Philosophy and religion Teacher at the Johnnie Colemon Theological Seminary. Professor of biblical criticism at the Center for Inquiry Institute.
Most relevant books:
· Deconstructing Jesus
· Jesus is Dead
· Inerrant the Wind: The Evangelical Crisis in Biblical Authority
· The Case Against the Case for Christ
5. Robert G. Ingersoll:
Credentials:
Ø Philosopher, Statesman, Attorney General of Illinois who defended a man against the charge of blasphemy which subsequently watered down the interpretation of the laws of blasphemy.
Most relevant books:
· The Gods and Other Lectures
· Some Mistakes by Moses
· Voltaire, A Lecture
6. Sir James George Frazer
Credentials:
Ø He studied at the University of Glasgow and Trinity College, Cambridge, where he graduated with honours in Classics (his dissertation would be published years later as The Growth of Plato's Ideal Theory) and remained a Classics Fellow all his life. He went on from Trinity to study law at the Middle Temple and yet never practised. He was four times elected to Trinity's Title Alpha Fellowship, and was associated with the college for most of his life, except for a year, 19071908, spent at the University of Liverpool. He was knighted in 1914, and a public lectureship in social anthropology at the universities of Cambridge, Oxford, Glasgow and Liverpool was established in his honour in 1921.
Most relevant book:
· The Golden Bough
7. Ernest Renan
Credentials:
· Expert in ancient Middle Eastern languages and civilizations, Philosopher and Author.
Most relevant Books:
· The Life of Jesus
8. M.M Mangasarian
Credentials:
· Princeton University Graduate, Theologian and ex-Presbyterian Minister, Author.
Most Relevant Books:
· The Truth About Jesus, Is He a Myth?
· The Bible Unveiled]
· How the Bible was Invented
Really? Scholars?
Writing a few books does not a scholar make. Especially when these books were published over 100 years ago.
Again, a lawyer, not a historian/biblical studies specialist.
Very much a scholars, but alas, doesn't support the mythicist hypothsesis. Saying there is no "archaeological evidence" just means we haven't unearthed something besides textual evidence that directly supports his existence.
· Biblical Archaeology: A Very Short Introduction.
The first relevant name on your list!
You're referring to the 19th century Ingersoll here? Reall?
Also a very, very old source, but he backed of the mythicist hypothesis.
Not a mythicist
Not a historian.
Well you're 1 for 8 so far. For the next set, try including actual historians/biblical scholars, preferably one's who have published something on the subject in the past 50 years. And if you can find one who has published an academic (rather than popular) work supporting the mythicist case (as even Price has not), that would be even better.
michaelsherlock
Member
I am presenting people who have presented evidence both indivually and collectively that go towards showing that Jesus was not an historical character, I am assuming you have actually read these works, or else you may not be commenting.
Remembering Einstien's famous quote; condemnation without investigation is the height of ignorance.
If you are only looking for Bible scholars then of course the pickings become slim, as most bible scholars are infected with belief and this belief obscures thier findings, it is the belief which conditions experience. Just read the referenced works above and then get back to me. I am not saying these scholars prove Jesus did not exist, but they do present evidence which gives us reason to question whether he did.
At the end of the day it matters not whether he lived or not as an historical person, what does matter are the fruits of his religion and if we analyze the situation on that ground, we find that "He" has had more of a detrimental impact on humanity than the Devil himself.
However, as I am myself an Author, I do not have the luxury of being on this forum as much as I would like, but I will endevor to share many more scholarly works and references with those who are interested.
I shall leave you for now with a quote by the Social-Psychologist, Leon Festinger:
"A man with a conviction is a hard man to change. Tell him you disagree and he turns away. Show him facts or figures and he questions your sources. Appeal to logic and he fails to see your point.
Food For Thought!
Did you? I mean, you listed Renan. Did you read it? Say, the beginning of chapter 2?
"Jésus naquit à Nazareth, petite ville de Galilée, qui n'eut avant lui aucune célébrité. Toute sa vie il fut désigné du nom de « Nazaréen » et ce n'est que par un détour assez embarrassé qu'on réussit, dans sa légende, à le faire naître à Bethléhem."
There's a reason he called his work Vie de Jésus. It's about Jesus' life. Or what about Cline?
Well, let's see: Renan writes about his life, giving evidence he did exist. Eric Cline, in his book Jerusalem Besieged (University of Michigan Press, 2010), writes: "The territory [Jerusalem] was made into a Roman province and governed by a Roman procurator. The transition to provincial status was a significant event in the history of the region. It was during this period that Jesus-who scholars now think was probably born in either 7 or 4 BCE-grew to adulthood." p. 108
A few pages later, after discussing a Temple incident in Jerusalem in 26 CE, Cline writes "Only a few years after this, the events involving Jesus that are familiar from the accounts in the New Testament took place in Jerusalem."
Cline also accepts that Jesus was a historical individual.
No, what you are doing is finding anyone you can, no matter how unrelated their field of expertise is to history or biblical studies, or how dated their material is, to support your view. I can find more "evidence" for young earth creationism than you have presented here. It's still wrong. As for reading them, I've read Price, Renan, Cline, and Frazer. Only two are modern, and only one thinks there isn't enough evidence of a historical Jesus (Price).
Interesting. You mean investigation is finding random popular works from the 19th or early 20th century, most written by non-specialists, and ignoring the past 100+ years of critical inquiry into the historical Jesus by specialists? What I've done is read a whole lot of modern scholarship, from several volume series to journal articles, on the subject. There are quite a range of views on any number of subjects. What there aren't is academic publications presenting evidence that Jesus did not exist. If there were, you wouldn't have to go digging around books written by school teachers over 100 years ago.
You cite a school teacher an ardent atheist who published a book in 1909 and this is considered evidence, but you feel free to write off biblical scholars because they're "infected with belief" ??? How about classicists then? Or historians of Judaism? You think that Jewish scholars like Vermes or the Rabbi Jacob Neusner have been "infected" with some belief to validate the historical existence of Jesus? And if biblical studies indoctrinates people as you say, why do we have biblical scholars like Ehrman who started out as fundamentalist christians but lost their faith and became agnostic because of their educational experience?
Textual criticism and historical Jesus studies run counter to mainstream christian views. The catholic priest J.P. Meier's four-volume work on the historical Jesus reaches many conclusions which run counter to his own belief. Why? Because he's writing history, and history isn't faith.
Before you write off biblical scholars as biased (and then proceed to list one, R. M Price), you should give some evidence for this. In fact, what's your basis for assuming all, most, or a majority of the massive amount of academic literature on the historical Jesus was written by christians?
Yes, I had to read Festinger more than once. One of my undergraduate majors was Psychology & Sociology, so of course cognitive dissonance and Festinger were subjects discussed more than once.
michaelsherlock
Member
Firstly, thank you for your response, I can see you have put alot of effort into it and I really appreciate it.
Yes, I have read Ernest Renan's; The Life of Jesus (in English) and Chapter 2, although not recalling from memory, as my research is broad and I cannot remember all I have read, but I do own the book, is as follows:
"Jesus was born at Nazareth,[1] a small town of Galilee, which before
his time had no celebrity.[2] All his life he was designated by the
name of "the Nazarene,"[3] and it is only by a rather embarrassed and
round-about way,[4] that, in the legends respecting him, he is made
to be born at Bethlehem. We shall see later[5] the motive for this
supposition, and how it was the necessary consequence of the Messianic
character attributed to Jesus.[6] The precise date of his birth is
unknown."
The reason I chose to include Renan is predominantly due to the controversy surrounding his book, pertaining to the notion he put forward regarding the probability that Jesus was no Son of God, as the Gospels Claim and that there has been alot of mythologizing surrounding his existence. I am fully aware that he viewed Jesus as an "historical person" yet his attack on the Christian belief, that Jesus was the magical son of Yahweh, brings into question the testimony contained within the Gospels and other extra-biblical literature. For me, the issue of historicity is inextricably woven into the material from which this character has been portreyed. Thus, if the material is spurious and contains falsehoods, which is not proven by anyone, but nevertheless, strong evidence of this fact has been relayed by many of the scholars I have listed, then the "historical" evidence of Jesus is somewhat invalidated by this material.
I am particularly fond of Renan's statement: "He (Jesus) believes himself to be more than an ordinary man, but separated from God by an infinite distance. He is
Son of God, but all men are..."
With regards to Cline, I have read the book I referenced; Biblical Archaeology; A Short Introduction and the statement made by Cline, which I quote in the first volume in my three volume series, 'I Am Christ,' says:
"Archaeology has not yet been able to shed any direct light on the birth, life, or death of Jesus. That is to say, there is not yet any archaeological evidence for the historical Jesusor any of the apostles for that matter . However, the failure of biblical archaeologists and pseudo-archaeologists to provide confirmatory evidence of the life of Jesus and the apostles has not been for lack of trying ."
I am well aware of Cline's religious persuasions and his beliefs, but his science on the issue of proving an historical Jesus is more relavent to the subject matter at hand, than what he believes or disbelieves. Cline admits that we have no evidence for an historical Jesus outside various textual sources, sources that when investigated, turn out to be predominantly spurious.
The reason I provide a wide range of diverse scholarship is to show that from many different angles, one can deconstruct the Christian mythology, and no matter how "dated" you feel a source might be, if it is supported by logic and evidence then it is still valid, even if it conflicts with your own belief system, which I am not sure in your case. Are you a Christian? Just wondering!
Now, you say that I am "wrong." Is this a statement of fact, or a statement of belief, because it sounds like a statement of belief, which is why I asked the question above. How do you know Jesus existed? How can I prove he didn't? Both of us are at a loss to either prove or disprove the matter. What we can do however, is analyze the issue as dispassionately as possible, which means letting go of biases and seek to find the truth, no matter where it lay!
I am intending on presenting evidence to contradict the Christian belief system, as I will be doing with almost all areas of belief, for one of my hobbies is twisting the knickers of up tight beleivers of every hue! The reason I do this is not simply for my own amusement, but also to shed light on some much needed humility, which our species seems to be in serious lack! Belief inspires certainty and certainty inspires arrogance and arrogance inspires insanity! Just look at the world! We have to do something because the old ways are not working, so why not try looking at things in a new way? Beyond belief, well as beyond as we can possibly get, may be the solution to a more harmonious world, one without conflict and schism occasioned by belief inspired insanity. Just a possibility!
You seemed to have misunderstood me. I did not say that biblical studies infects the mind, for I have undertaken biblical studies for some years now and I do not believe. What I said was that when we are looking at the work of the majoritiy of Biblical scholars, we are dealing with people who have pre-established beliefs. Of course Ehrman is one of the few exceptions, along with Mangasarian, which I noted you did not address, yet the "pickings become slim" as I put it, meaning that there are not too many who could even concieve of a world without Christ (possibly a real world).
The reason I assert the above is because I have read a great number of works by Bible scholars and the majority are Christian. If you are claiming that this statement is wrong, prove it!
History does involve a certain degree of faith and if the mind is already infected, then the outcome will be most probably obscured.
I see that you studied Sociology and Psychology at Uni, me too, and Pol-Sci and Law. So what do you do now?
michaelsherlock
Member
Sources of the Christ Myth Part 2
To clear away any ambiguities from the outset, allow me to say that the following list comprises authors and scholars who have presented evidence which casts a shadow over the certainty of an historical Christ. This historical Christ to which I refer, is the one related in the Gospels, the one who was born of a virgin, like Hercules, had has birth announced by divine announcers, like Pythagoras and Alexander the Great, who escaped infanticide by a tyrant in the nick of time, like Krishna, Moses, Osiris and others, who could heal the sick like Asclepius and Apollo, or raise the dead like Hercules and many others, who was killed, resurrected and ascended to the Heavens and stars like many other earlier Pagan gods and demi-gods. That is the historical Christ which both the previous and the lists to come, pertain to.
Further, to avoid confusion with my use of the term scholar, by this term I mean anyone who has studied both ancient and modern mythologies, religions, histories and various annals, whether they be part of a recognized institution or not. For those who crave the authority, or the symbolic father figure in the form of specialized initials (i.e PhD, Dr. Rev. Prof.) or membership to those recognized institutions, I would beg you to look beyond such trivialities and realize that you are not seeking the truth, but rather, an authority figure to tell you the truth! It is time to grow up! However, for those who are still at that infantile state of immaturity with regards to such cravings, I will include some of these Daddies just for you!
Finally, regardless of whether such works were written 100 years ago, or yesterday, I urge you to read them and decide for yourself! Try not to let your beliefs dictate what you see or miss, where you place your emphasis and what you ignore, just look at the arguments from a neutral point, as is humanly possible, keeping in mind that you will, as I do myself, partake in confirmation bias to at least some degree, but recognizing this is the first step toward the ascension beyond ego-based thinking!
9. Joseph Campbell
Credentials: Professor of Mythology at Princeton University.
Relevant Books:
· Hero with a Thousand Faces
· World Mythology
10. Carl G. Jung
Credentials:
· Founder of Analytical Psychology
· Professional Psychiatrist
Relevant Books:
· Psychology and Religion
· Man and His Symbols
11. John M. Robertson
Credentials:
· Assistant Editor of National Reformer (Newspaper)
· Lecturer at Free Thinking South Place Ethical Society
Relevant Books:
· Christianity and Mythology
· Pagan Christs
· A Short History of Christianity
12. Arthur Drews
Credentials:
· Professor of Philosophy
Relevant Books:
· The Christ Myth
13. R. Joseph Hoffman.
Credentials:
· Dr of Philosophy. Oxford University and Historian.
Relevant Book:
· Sources of the Jesus Tradition; Separating History from Myth
14. David Mills
Credentials:
Written bestselling psychology and self-help literature for the Albert Ellis Institute in New York and for psychotherapy clients worldwide. Journalist who covered NASA's Space Shuttle program at the Kennedy Space Center.
Relevant book:
· Atheist Universe; The Thinking Persons Answer to Christian Fundamentalism
15. Richard Dawkins
Credentials:
· Ethologist, evolutionary biologist and author. Emeritus fellow of New College, Oxford, and was the University of Oxford's Professor for Public Understanding of Science.
Relevant Book:
· The God Delusion
16. Solomon Schimmel
Credentials:
· Professor of Education and Psychology at Hebrew College, Newton, MA.
Relevant Book:
· The Tenacity of Unreasonable Beliefs
19. Thomas Paine
Credentials:
· Journalist, author, pamphleteer, radical, inventor, intellectual, revolutionary, and one of the Founding Fathers of the United States.
Relevant Book:
· The Age of Reason
· The Complete Theological Works of Thomas Paine
20. T.W. Doane
Credentials: (do not know, but his comparative work in the book mentioned below is brilliant, in my opinion. If you need credentials here, before reading it, ask daddy first ok!)
Relevant Books:
· Bible Myths and their Parralells
To clear away any ambiguities from the outset, allow me to say that the following list comprises authors and scholars who have presented evidence which casts a shadow over the certainty of an historical Christ. This historical Christ to which I refer, is the one related in the Gospels, the one who was born of a virgin, like Hercules, had has birth announced by divine announcers, like Pythagoras and Alexander the Great, who escaped infanticide by a tyrant in the nick of time, like Krishna, Moses, Osiris and others, who could heal the sick like Asclepius and Apollo, or raise the dead like Hercules and many others, who was killed, resurrected and ascended to the Heavens and stars like many other earlier Pagan gods and demi-gods. That is the historical Christ which both the previous and the lists to come, pertain to.
Further, to avoid confusion with my use of the term scholar, by this term I mean anyone who has studied both ancient and modern mythologies, religions, histories and various annals, whether they be part of a recognized institution or not. For those who crave the authority, or the symbolic father figure in the form of specialized initials (i.e PhD, Dr. Rev. Prof.) or membership to those recognized institutions, I would beg you to look beyond such trivialities and realize that you are not seeking the truth, but rather, an authority figure to tell you the truth! It is time to grow up! However, for those who are still at that infantile state of immaturity with regards to such cravings, I will include some of these Daddies just for you!
Finally, regardless of whether such works were written 100 years ago, or yesterday, I urge you to read them and decide for yourself! Try not to let your beliefs dictate what you see or miss, where you place your emphasis and what you ignore, just look at the arguments from a neutral point, as is humanly possible, keeping in mind that you will, as I do myself, partake in confirmation bias to at least some degree, but recognizing this is the first step toward the ascension beyond ego-based thinking!
9. Joseph Campbell
Credentials: Professor of Mythology at Princeton University.
Relevant Books:
· Hero with a Thousand Faces
· World Mythology
10. Carl G. Jung
Credentials:
· Founder of Analytical Psychology
· Professional Psychiatrist
Relevant Books:
· Psychology and Religion
· Man and His Symbols
11. John M. Robertson
Credentials:
· Assistant Editor of National Reformer (Newspaper)
· Lecturer at Free Thinking South Place Ethical Society
Relevant Books:
· Christianity and Mythology
· Pagan Christs
· A Short History of Christianity
12. Arthur Drews
Credentials:
· Professor of Philosophy
Relevant Books:
· The Christ Myth
13. R. Joseph Hoffman.
Credentials:
· Dr of Philosophy. Oxford University and Historian.
Relevant Book:
· Sources of the Jesus Tradition; Separating History from Myth
14. David Mills
Credentials:
Written bestselling psychology and self-help literature for the Albert Ellis Institute in New York and for psychotherapy clients worldwide. Journalist who covered NASA's Space Shuttle program at the Kennedy Space Center.
Relevant book:
· Atheist Universe; The Thinking Persons Answer to Christian Fundamentalism
15. Richard Dawkins
Credentials:
· Ethologist, evolutionary biologist and author. Emeritus fellow of New College, Oxford, and was the University of Oxford's Professor for Public Understanding of Science.
Relevant Book:
· The God Delusion
16. Solomon Schimmel
Credentials:
· Professor of Education and Psychology at Hebrew College, Newton, MA.
Relevant Book:
· The Tenacity of Unreasonable Beliefs
19. Thomas Paine
Credentials:
· Journalist, author, pamphleteer, radical, inventor, intellectual, revolutionary, and one of the Founding Fathers of the United States.
Relevant Book:
· The Age of Reason
· The Complete Theological Works of Thomas Paine
20. T.W. Doane
Credentials: (do not know, but his comparative work in the book mentioned below is brilliant, in my opinion. If you need credentials here, before reading it, ask daddy first ok!)
Relevant Books:
· Bible Myths and their Parralells
Pummel that straw man!
michaelsherlock
Member
Pummel that straw man!
Who is the strawman?
doppelganger
Through the Looking Glass
Ray Bolger
fallingblood
Agnostic Theist
He accepts that Jesus existed. He argues against the Biblical portrayal. Most scholars also agree that the Biblical portrayal is not historical.
Actually, most of the individuals on your list state that Jesus existed. Just not as the Bible states though; which is also what actual scholars state.
Last edited:
You started your post with the following:
Renan wrote what he believed was a critical historical account of the historical Jesus. That's what modern historians do as well, only they're better. It in no way supports or promotes the concept of the "christ myth" unless by "christ myth" you mean "Jesus was not the son of god." In which case, almost every single work on the historical Jesus would support this, as even believing christian scholars seperate the historical Jesus from the christ of faith.
Then why not look at modern historical-critical accounts? As these deal with exactly that issue using modern historical methods.
Not in the slightest. That's the point of the whole concept of the "historical Jesus." It's the recognition that the historical person must be differentiated from the Jesus Christ of the gospels.
Cline admits that we have no evidence for an historical Jesus outside various textual sources, sources that when investigated, turn out to be predominantly spurious.
[/quote]
We don't have archaeological evidence for just about anyone from ancient history. As for "predominantly spurious" so far all you've listed to support this conclusion is a handful of largely outdated and/or irrelevant works.
1) You haven't provided a wide range. You've selected a tiny handful.
2) Most aren't scholars.
3) Most are outdated
4) Of the two who are modern, one knows full well we have enough evidence to say that there was a historical Jesus.
There is no logically sound argument that a historical Jesus didn't exist. That's why you have to resort to random individuals and works written a century ago. There's plenty of good, logical arguments to support the fact that we can't know a great deal about this person, and virtually all historical Jesus scholarship approaches the sources from a critical standpoint.
I have no "belief system." I'm very much interested in accuracy and truth, and I find distortions, particularly blatant ones, more than a little distasteful.
I can't know. As with all of history and most of science it's a matter of the most likely explanation from the evidence. There's no plausible argument given the evidence we have which supports the notion that Jesus existed. It's possible he didn't, and in my mind certainly more possible than that he rose from the dead, but it's also "possible" that the gospels were actually written by Matthew, Luke, Mark, and John. It's just extremely unlikely.
How can you claime to analyze the issue dispassionately by rejecting all modern historical Jesus scholarship as biased so that you can support picking whatever sources you can find which you think support your conclusion, whether or not they do or whether or not you've actually read them? There are volumes and volumes of work on this subject by specialists, with a wide range of views, from "we can know very little" to "the gospels are pretty accurate histories from which we can know a lot about the historical Jesus." If you want to "analyze the issue" you would need to address their arguments, not dig around for hundred year old material written by random individuals.
Then you are going about it terribly. Believing christian scholars do a better job of this.
Everyone does. But if you mean pre-established religious beliefs, or that these beliefs make their works too biased, then evidence for that would be nice, considering your "dispassionate" approach.
I didn't address Mangasarian because there's no point in addressing a non-specialist who wrote a century ago when I can read the primary sources myself as well as the past 50+ years of critical historical Jesus scholarship. Reimarus, Strauss, Holtzmann, Renan, Wrede, & Schweitzer are one thing. They are important because of the foundations they set.
But I'm not going to read a bunch of random accounts from the 19th or early 20th century so that I can reinvent the wheel using bad tools.
I'm not making any claims as to their beliefs. I know many are believing christians, and many are not. However, the people who are in the best position to know about the historical Jesus are those who can read the Greek, Latin, Hebrew, and Aramaic sources (at least) as well as the secondary scholarship (most of which is not written in English, but in German, French, and Italian). You are the one discounting the very people most informed about this issue with a claim that they are too biased. When asked to substantiate this claim, you turn around and ask me to "prove" they aren't?
I'm a researcher in cognitive science. My main research areas of interests are linguistics, dynamical systems, and neuroscience.
michaelsherlock
Member
I realize that the issue of historicity is seperate from the doctrines of faith surrounding Jesus, but as the Gospels are alleged to be historically accurate recordings I think one can safely tie the issues together and if one aspect falls, both will. This is the aim of the list I have provided. So if an author or scholar has presented evidence to undermine the Biblical version of the events surrounding Jesus' life, then I think that such work is relevant in undermining the story as a whole. Again I realize that the issues are essentially seperate, yet I feel that if we can just get rid of Christ, Mohammad and the others, we may have a chance at either finding GOd, or at the very least creating a more intelligent and enlightened species, one which is free from the infirmities it has been burdened with as a result of religion, in particular, Abrahamic religion.
fallingblood
Agnostic Theist
The logic you are using though can also be applied to Alexander the Great, or Augustus. Both has supernatural ideas attached to them. Not to mention the many other great figures in history who have had the same.
In context, there is no problem with supernatural stories being attached to Jesus. It is what we would expect.
A
angellous_evangellous
Guest
Pythagoras would be a good example. Or the history of the Pythagoreans.
Dirty Penguin
Master Of Ceremony
I think that's my position as well. I'm looking into some of the Gnostic text. I'm interested in reading the Gospel of Thomas. Something I've noticed about the four gospels is that Mark, even though it contains many esoteric overtones, seems to be more toned down in its fanciful claims about Yeshua than Matthew, Luke and John. The Gospel of Thomas seems to be more of the sayings of Yeshua but lacks all the drama told in the other gospels. Let me know you you all think. To me it seems that the earlier writings about Yeshua that portray him as a regular guy (rabbi/teacher) seem to be closer to the "real" Yeshua.