Jesus--Fact or Fiction??

[Mike Cl]

Element 12:
From as early as we can ascertain, Christians believed they became 'brothers' of the Lord Jesus Christ through baptism (Rom 6.3-10), which symbolized their death to the world and rebirth as the 'adopted sons of God', hence they became the brothers of the Lord, the son of God.  Thus Jesus was only 'the firstborn among many brethren' (Rom 8.29).

[Mike Cl]

Element 13:
Like all mystery cults, Christianity had secret doctrines that initiates were sworn never to reveal, and that would be talked about and written about publicly only in symbols, myths and allegories to disguise their true meaning.

[Greatest I am]

Element 12:
From as early as we can ascertain, Christians believed they became 'brothers' of the Lord Jesus Christ through baptism (Rom 6.3-10), which symbolized their death to the world and rebirth as the 'adopted sons of God', hence they became the brothers of the Lord, the son of God.  Thus Jesus was only 'the firstborn among many brethren' (Rom 8.29).

This is a new one on me.  I'll have to look into it in more detail.  At first glance, it seems to fit the Barnum and Bailey saying--a sucker is born every minute.

I like the quote that says that religion was born when the first con man met the first sucker.

Regards
DL

[Greatest I am]

Element 12:
From as early as we can ascertain, Christians believed they became 'brothers' of the Lord Jesus Christ through baptism (Rom 6.3-10), which symbolized their death to the world and rebirth as the 'adopted sons of God', hence they became the brothers of the Lord, the son of God.  Thus Jesus was only 'the firstborn among many brethren' (Rom 8.29).

Yes. Quite elevating as compared to what Christianity has done by putting God out of reach for us.

That is why they never quote these, which show the way that the more sage like Jesus taught.

Matthew 6:22 The light of the body is the eye: if therefore thine eye be single, thy whole body shall be full of light.

John 14:23 Jesus answered and said unto him, If a man love me, he will keep my words: and my Father will love him, and we will come unto him, and make our abode with him.

Romans 8:29 For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of his Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren.

Regards
DL

[Greatest I am]

Element 13:
Like all mystery cults, Christianity had secret doctrines that initiates were sworn never to reveal, and that would be talked about and written about publicly only in symbols, myths and allegories to disguise their true meaning.

I don't know if I would use the word disguise.

I see it more as Jesus trying to make the message meaningful to all, regardless of their religious tradition. He was trying to take it out of the context of a specific tradition because it is quite hard to have someone leave the comfort of their own tribal traditions.

It was that or use force the way Christianity and Islam did to grow their religions instead of good moral arguments.

Regards
DL

[trdsf]

This is a new one on me.  I'll have to look into it in more detail.  At first glance, it seems to fit the Barnum and Bailey saying--a sucker is born every minute.

I like the idea of regular atheist get-togethers, even if it's on a Sunday morning.  Having a sense of community is a good thing, especially in a minority like ours, where many of us have had the "ugh, I'm surrounded!!" mindset at various times.  It'd be a psychological 'safe space'.

I just wish people would resist the urge to call it an 'atheist church' since of all things, that's quite emphatically what it's not.

Heh.  I did just imagine an atheist 'church festival', though -- we could call the bingo/poker/gambling areas the Probability Studies Hands-On Activity Tents.

[Cavebear]

Wow!  I leave for a few hours and the train seems to go off the rails!

When did we atheists stop treating the alleged "Jesus" as a made-up being and start treating the idea as real?

Or have the theists taken over the site?  Do I have to be here 25/8?

[trdsf]

Wow!  I leave for a few hours and the train seems to go off the rails!

When did we atheists stop treating the alleged "Jesus" as a made-up being and start treating the idea as real?

Or have the theists taken over the site?  Do I have to be here 25/8?

Oh, I dunno.  There may or may not have been a historical Jeshua bar-Joseph.  I think most of us here will agree if there was, he was not divine, of course.  I just don't think it's of much relevance since even if it were demonstrated that he did physically exist, that has no bearing on the merit of the claim of divinity.  If mere existence were enough, then we would be forced to consider the Roman emperors who were deified to be legitimate and real gods since we have evidence for their historicity.

[Cavebear]

Oh, I dunno.  There may or may not have been a historical Jeshua bar-Joseph.  I think most of us here will agree if there was, he was not divine, of course.  I just don't think it's of much relevance since even if it were demonstrated that he did physically exist, that has no bearing on the merit of the claim of divinity.  If mere existence were enough, then we would be forced to consider the Roman emperors who were deified to be legitimate and real gods since we have evidence for their historicity.

The roman emperors were mentioned by many people (as good or bad). in their lives and civic records.  There are monuments and statues to many.  The alleged Jesus wasn't.

[Greatest I am]

I like the idea of regular atheist get-togethers, even if it's on a Sunday morning.  Having a sense of community is a good thing, especially in a minority like ours, where many of us have had the "ugh, I'm surrounded!!" mindset at various times.  It'd be a psychological 'safe space'.

I just wish people would resist the urge to call it an 'atheist church' since of all things, that's quite emphatically what it's not.

Heh.  I did just imagine an atheist 'church festival', though -- we could call the bingo/poker/gambling areas the Probability Studies Hands-On Activity Tents.

The word church already has as a part of it's definition as a place of fellowship, which is what you are highlighting, and that fact is likely why atheists are using the term.

It is also easier than to try to have people recognize some new unknown word. There is a term for that but my English is too poor to recall what doing that is.

Regards
DL

[Mike Cl]

  Do I have to be here 25/8?

Yes, yes you do.

[Mike Cl]

I don't know if I would use the word disguise.

I see it more as Jesus trying to make the message meaningful to all, regardless of their religious tradition. He was trying to take it out of the context of a specific tradition because it is quite hard to have someone leave the comfort of their own tribal traditions.

I hope you realize that the 'Elements' I am posting are from Richard Carrier?

As for Jesus trying to do anything; it would be difficult for a fictitious person to do that.  All the 'quotes' from Jesus are simply somebody else using 'him' as a mouthpiece.  It would be like me spouting philosophy through the mouth of Bugs Bunny.  It's all fiction.

[Mike Cl]

That is why they never quote these, which show the way that the more sage like Jesus taught.
Regards
DL

'Jesus' never taught anything--he is a fiction.

[trdsf]

The roman emperors were mentioned by many people (as good or bad). in their lives and civic records.  There are monuments and statues to many.  The alleged Jesus wasn't.

That's not really the point I was trying to make.  My point is that even if the existence of Jeshua bar-Joseph were as well-attested as the existence of any of the Caesars, it would have absolutely no bearing on the claims of divinity attached to him or on the mythology based thereon.  The historicity of Siddhārtha Gautama and Muḥammad ibn Ê¿Abdullāh don't mean that Buddhist and Islamic mythology is true, after all.

I think it not unlikely that the biblical Jesus is probably based on at least one preacher active at that time, and may be an amalgamation of several.  Whether there was an actual, physical Jeshua bar-Joseph at the core of it, I don't know and I'm not much fussed either way.

Personally, I think the amalgamation theory is most likely, since that provides a reasonable basis for why 'Jesus' says and does contradictory or mutually-exclusive things, depending on which account one reads.

[trdsf]

The word church already has as a part of it's definition as a place of fellowship, which is what you are highlighting, and that fact is likely why atheists are using the term.

It is also easier than to try to have people recognize some new unknown word. There is a term for that but my English is too poor to recall what doing that is.

The problem with 'church' as a term is that while it may have a technical secular secondary or tertiary meaning, if you say 'church' to 100 English-speakers, I'd lay money that all 100 of them would assume 'place of religious activity'.

The other problem with using the term is that it would only encourage those who try to claim that atheism is 'just another religion' -- they would latch on to that word with glee.

I don't mind a neologism -- I think that's the word you were looking for -- to be applied to an atheist meeting place, although the more I think about it, the more I like the term 'symposium'.  While today it's come to mean an academic conference, it was in classical Greece basically hanging out after dinner, drinking wine, with or without entertainment.

And really, that would be a lovely way to spend a Sunday afternoon: drop down to the local atheist symposium for coffee and conversation with like-minded people and a lecture, a formal debate, a poetry slam, a jam session, the showing of a documentary, or whatever.