The Jesus Puzzle


 Religions > Atheism > The Jesus Puzzle

LINK TO THIS PAGE  


rating :  0   |  0


  Page 1 of 3

1
 

2
 

3
 
Topic: Religions > Atheism
User: "Maurice Bastarache"
Date: 27 Dec 2006 05:16:32 PM
Object: The Jesus Puzzle
This is my first post on this newsgroup, although I have posted in other
newsgroups. Even though my wife is a believer and we are raising our
children as catholics, I have always considered myself a non believer,
although probably more an agnostic than an athesit.
I have just finished reading The Jesus Puzzle by Earl Doherty. I don't agree
with everything he writes, but he makes some reasonable and logical points
and for the first time I have read a book on religion that actually makes
sense to me. Forget the Jesus is our saviour and is the son of God
sh**...religion and Jesus and God is essentially a construct of our own
fervent imaginations.
There..I said it...lol
M
.

User: "Agent Smith"

Title: Re: The Jesus Puzzle 28 Dec 2006 02:15:13 AM
"Maurice Bastarache" <mauricebast@nb.aibn.com> wrote in
news:k9Dkh.37821$cz.556781@ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca:

This is my first post on this newsgroup, although I have posted in
other newsgroups. Even though my wife is a believer and we are raising
our children as catholics, I have always considered myself a non
believer, although probably more an agnostic than an athesit.

I have just finished reading The Jesus Puzzle by Earl Doherty. I don't
agree with everything he writes, but he makes some reasonable and
logical points and for the first time I have read a book on religion
that actually makes sense to me. Forget the Jesus is our saviour and
is the son of God sh**...religion and Jesus and God is essentially a
construct of our own fervent imaginations.

I'm partial to the opinion that Jesus was an *extremely* clever dude who
was in the right place at the right time. It's as much about his
followers as about him. Apparently some of the disciples went on to do
some pretty impressive preaching themselves.
.
User: "Jim07D6"

Title: Re: The Jesus Puzzle 28 Dec 2006 09:31:20 AM
Agent Smith <agent-smith@two-blocks-on-your-left.com> said:

"Maurice Bastarache" <mauricebast@nb.aibn.com> wrote in
news:k9Dkh.37821$cz.556781@ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca:

This is my first post on this newsgroup, although I have posted in
other newsgroups. Even though my wife is a believer and we are raising
our children as catholics, I have always considered myself a non
believer, although probably more an agnostic than an athesit.

I have just finished reading The Jesus Puzzle by Earl Doherty. I don't
agree with everything he writes, but he makes some reasonable and
logical points and for the first time I have read a book on religion
that actually makes sense to me. Forget the Jesus is our saviour and
is the son of God sh**...religion and Jesus and God is essentially a
construct of our own fervent imaginations.


I'm partial to the opinion that Jesus was an *extremely* clever dude who
was in the right place at the right time. It's as much about his
followers as about him. Apparently some of the disciples went on to do
some pretty impressive preaching themselves.

I can only think of Jesus as a character, like Hamlet. As such, he was
wise and charismatic up to a point, then went really, really stupid or
insane.
-- Jim07D6
.

User: "Neil Kelsey"

Title: Re: The Jesus Puzzle 28 Dec 2006 08:54:13 AM
Agent Smith wrote:

"Maurice Bastarache" <mauricebast@nb.aibn.com> wrote in
news:k9Dkh.37821$cz.556781@ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca:

This is my first post on this newsgroup, although I have posted in
other newsgroups. Even though my wife is a believer and we are raising
our children as catholics, I have always considered myself a non
believer, although probably more an agnostic than an athesit.

I have just finished reading The Jesus Puzzle by Earl Doherty. I don't
agree with everything he writes, but he makes some reasonable and
logical points and for the first time I have read a book on religion
that actually makes sense to me. Forget the Jesus is our saviour and
is the son of God sh**...religion and Jesus and God is essentially a
construct of our own fervent imaginations.


I'm partial to the opinion that Jesus was an *extremely* clever dude who
was in the right place at the right time. It's as much about his
followers as about him. Apparently some of the disciples went on to do
some pretty impressive preaching themselves.

I'm not impressed.
.
User: "Agent Smith"

Title: Re: The Jesus Puzzle 29 Dec 2006 02:06:20 AM
"Neil Kelsey" <neil_kelsey@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:1167317652.986399.116790@73g2000cwn.googlegroups.com:


Agent Smith wrote:

"Maurice Bastarache" <mauricebast@nb.aibn.com> wrote in
news:k9Dkh.37821$cz.556781@ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca:

This is my first post on this newsgroup, although I have posted in
other newsgroups. Even though my wife is a believer and we are
raising our children as catholics, I have always considered myself
a non believer, although probably more an agnostic than an athesit.

I have just finished reading The Jesus Puzzle by Earl Doherty. I
don't agree with everything he writes, but he makes some reasonable
and logical points and for the first time I have read a book on
religion that actually makes sense to me. Forget the Jesus is our
saviour and is the son of God sh**...religion and Jesus and God is
essentially a construct of our own fervent imaginations.


I'm partial to the opinion that Jesus was an *extremely* clever dude
who was in the right place at the right time. It's as much about his
followers as about him. Apparently some of the disciples went on to
do some pretty impressive preaching themselves.


I'm not impressed.

Go on.
.
User: "Neil Kelsey"

Title: Re: The Jesus Puzzle 29 Dec 2006 02:19:47 AM
Agent Smith wrote:

"Neil Kelsey" <neil_kelsey@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:1167317652.986399.116790@73g2000cwn.googlegroups.com:


Agent Smith wrote:

"Maurice Bastarache" <mauricebast@nb.aibn.com> wrote in
news:k9Dkh.37821$cz.556781@ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca:

This is my first post on this newsgroup, although I have posted in
other newsgroups. Even though my wife is a believer and we are
raising our children as catholics, I have always considered myself
a non believer, although probably more an agnostic than an athesit.

I have just finished reading The Jesus Puzzle by Earl Doherty. I
don't agree with everything he writes, but he makes some reasonable
and logical points and for the first time I have read a book on
religion that actually makes sense to me. Forget the Jesus is our
saviour and is the son of God sh**...religion and Jesus and God is
essentially a construct of our own fervent imaginations.


I'm partial to the opinion that Jesus was an *extremely* clever dude
who was in the right place at the right time. It's as much about his
followers as about him. Apparently some of the disciples went on to
do some pretty impressive preaching themselves.


I'm not impressed.


Go on.

I'll let Bertrand Russell go on, this is an excerpt from his 1927
essay, "Why I Am Not A Christian."
"The Character Of Christ
I now want to say a few words upon a topic which I often think is not
quite sufficiently dealt with by Rationalists, and that is the question
whether Christ was the best and the wisest of men. It is generally
taken for granted that we should all agree that that was so. I do not
myself. I think that there are a good many points upon which I agree
with Christ a great deal more than the professing Christians do. I do
not know that I could go with Him all the way, but I could go with Him
much further than most professing Christians can. You will remember
that He said: "Resist not evil, but whosoever shall smite thee on thy
right cheek, turn to him the other also." That is not a new precept or
a new principle. It was used by Lao-Tse and Buddha some 500 or 600
years before Christ, but it is not a principle which as a matter of
fact Christians accept. I have no doubt that the present Prime
Minister, for instance, is a most sincere Christian, but I should not
advise any of you to go and smite him on one cheek. I think you might
find that he thought this text was intended in a figurative sense.
Then there is another point which I consider excellent. You will
remember that Christ said, "Judge not lest ye be judged." That
principle I do not think you would find was popular in the law courts
of Christian countries. I have known in my time quite a number of
judges who were very earnest Christians, and they none of them felt
that they were acting contrary to Christian principles in what they
did. Then Christ says, "Give to him that asketh of thee, and from him
that would borrow of thee turn thou not away." This is a very good
principle. Your chairman has reminded you that we are not here to talk
politics, but I cannot help observing that the last general election
was fought on the question of how desirable it was to turn away from
him that would borrow of thee, so that one must assume that the
liberals and conservatives of this country are composed of people who
do not agree with the teaching of Christ, because they certainly did
very emphatically turn away on that occasion.
Then there is one other maxim of Christ which I think has a great deal
in it, but I do not find that it is very popular among some of our
Christian friends. He says, "If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell that
which thou hast, and give to the poor." That is a very excellent maxim,
but, as I say, it is not much practiced. All these, I think, are good
maxims, although they are a little difficult to live up to. I do not
profess to live up to them myself; but then, after all, I am not by way
of doing so, and it is not quite the same thing as for a Christian.
Defects In Christ's Teaching
Having granted the excellence of these maxims, I come to certain points
in which I do not believe that one can grant either the superlative
wisdom or the superlative goodness of Christ as depicted in the
Gospels; and here I may say that one is not concerned with the
historical question. Historically, it is quite doubtful whether Christ
ever existed at all, and if He did we do not know anything about Him,
so that I am not concerned with the historical question, which is a
very difficult one. I am concerned with Christ as He appears in the
Gospels, taking the Gospel narrative as it stands, and there one does
find some things that do not seem to be very wise. For one thing, he
certainly thought his second coming would occur in clouds of glory
before the death of all the people who were living at that time. There
are a great many texts that prove that. He says, for instance: "Ye
shall not have gone over the cities of Israel till the Son of Man be
come." Then He says: "There are some standing here which shall not
taste death till the Son of Man comes into His kingdom"; and there are
a lot of places where it is quite clear that He believed His second
coming would happen during the lifetime of many then living. That was
the belief of his earlier followers, and it was the basis of a good
deal of His moral teaching. When He said, "Take no thought for the
morrow," and things of that sort, it was very largely because He
thought the second coming was going to be very soon, and that all
ordinary mundane affairs did not count. I have, as a matter of fact,
known some Christians who did believe the second coming was imminent. I
knew a parson who frightened his congregation terribly by telling them
that the second coming was very imminent indeed, but they were much
consoled when they found that he was planting trees in his garden. The
early Christians really did believe it, and they did abstain from such
things as planting trees in their gardens, because they did accept from
Christ the belief that the second coming was imminent. In this respect
clearly He was not so wise as some other people have been, and he
certainly was not superlatively wise.
The Moral Problem
Then you come to moral questions. There is one very serious defect to
my mind in Christ's moral character, and that is that He believed in
hell. I do not myself feel that any person that is really profoundly
humane can believe in everlasting punishment. Christ certainly as
depicted in the Gospels did believe in everlasting punishment, and one
does find repeatedly a vindictive fury against those people who would
not listen to His preaching -- an attitude which is not uncommon with
preachers, but which does somewhat detract from superlative excellence.
You do not, for instance, find that attitude in Socrates. You find him
quite bland and urbane toward the people who would not listen to him;
and it is, to my mind, far more worthy of a sage to take that line than
to take the line of indignation. You probably all remember the sorts of
things that Socrates was saying when he was dying, and the sort of
things that he generally did say to people who did not agree with him.
You will find that in the Gospels Christ said: "Ye serpents, ye
generation of vipers, how can ye escape the damnation of hell." That
was said to people who did not like His preaching. It is not really to
my mind quite the best tone, and there are a great many of these things
about hell. There is, of course, the familiar text about the sin
against the Holy Ghost: "Whosoever speaketh against the Holy Ghost it
shall not be forgiven him neither in this world nor in the world to
come." That text has caused an unspeakable amount of misery in the
world, for all sorts of people have imagined that they have committed
the sin against the Holy Ghost, and thought that it would not be
forgiven them either in this world or in the world to come. I really do
not think that a person with a proper degree of kindliness in his
nature would have put fears and terrors of this sort into the world.
Then Christ says, "The Son of Man shall send forth His angels, and they
shall gather out of His kingdom all things that offend, and them which
do iniquity, and shall cast them into a furnace of fire; there shall be
wailing and gnashing of teeth"; and He goes on about the wailing and
gnashing of teeth. It comes in one verse after another, and it is quite
manifest to the reader that there is a certain pleasure in
contemplating wailing and gnashing of teeth, or else it would not occur
so often. Then you all, of course, remember about the sheep and the
goats; how at the second coming He is going to divide the sheep from
the goats, and He is going to say to the goats: "Depart from me, ye
cursed, into everlasting fire." He continues: "And these shall go away
into everlasting fire." Then He says again, "If thy hand offend thee,
cut it off; it is better for thee to enter into life maimed, than
having two hands to go into hell, into the fire that never shall be
quenched, where the worm dieth not and the fire is not quenched." He
repeats that again and again also. I must say that I think all this
doctrine, that hell-fire is a punishment for sin, is a doctrine of
cruelty. It is a doctrine that put cruelty into the world, and gave the
world generations of cruel torture; and the Christ of the Gospels, if
you could take Him as his chroniclers represent Him, would certainly
have to be considered partly responsible for that.
There are other things of less importance. There is the instance of the
Gadarene swine, where it certainly was not very kind to the pigs to put
the devils into them and make them rush down the hill into the sea. You
must remember that He was omnipotent, and He could have made the devils
simply go away; but He chose to send them into the pigs. Then there is
the curious story of the fig-tree, which always rather puzzled me. You
remember what happened about the fig-tree. "He was hungry; and seeing a
fig-tree afar off having leaves, He came if haply He might find
anything thereon; and when he came to it He found nothing but leaves,
for the time of figs was not yet. And Jesus answered and said unto it:
'No man eat fruit of thee hereafter for ever'.... and Peter.... saith
unto Him: 'Master, behold the fig-tree which thou cursedst is withered
away.'" This is a very curious story, because it was not the right time
of year for figs, and you really could not blame the tree. I cannot
myself feel that either in the matter of wisdom or in the matter of
virtue Christ stands quite as high as some other people known to
History. I think I should put Buddha and Socrates above Him in those
respects."
End of excerpt.
I'm still not even convinced Christ existed, although I tend to lean
that way. Otherwise, I like a lot of historical people better than the
character of Christ, Bertrand Russell included. Christ strikes me as a
charismatic schizophrenic when I read the New Testament.
.
User: "Agent Smith"

Title: Re: The Jesus Puzzle 29 Dec 2006 03:41:52 AM
"Neil Kelsey" <neil_kelsey@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:1167380387.847462.266480@n51g2000cwc.googlegroups.com:

Subject: Re: The Jesus Puzzle
From: "Neil Kelsey" <neil_kelsey@hotmail.com>
Newsgroups: alt.atheism


Agent Smith wrote:

"Neil Kelsey" <neil_kelsey@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:1167317652.986399.116790@73g2000cwn.googlegroups.com:


Agent Smith wrote:

"Maurice Bastarache" <mauricebast@nb.aibn.com> wrote in
news:k9Dkh.37821$cz.556781@ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca:

This is my first post on this newsgroup, although I have posted
in other newsgroups. Even though my wife is a believer and we
are raising our children as catholics, I have always considered
myself a non believer, although probably more an agnostic than
an athesit.

I have just finished reading The Jesus Puzzle by Earl Doherty. I
don't agree with everything he writes, but he makes some
reasonable and logical points and for the first time I have read
a book on religion that actually makes sense to me. Forget the
Jesus is our saviour and is the son of God sh**...religion and
Jesus and God is essentially a construct of our own fervent
imaginations.


I'm partial to the opinion that Jesus was an *extremely* clever
dude who was in the right place at the right time. It's as much
about his followers as about him. Apparently some of the
disciples went on to do some pretty impressive preaching
themselves.


I'm not impressed.


Go on.


I'll let Bertrand Russell go on, this is an excerpt from his 1927
essay, "Why I Am Not A Christian."

[snip]


I'm still not even convinced Christ existed, although I tend to lean
that way. Otherwise, I like a lot of historical people better than the
character of Christ, Bertrand Russell included. Christ strikes me as a
charismatic schizophrenic when I read the New Testament.

I think that you've got to give the devil his due, and accept the fact that
these people were products of their times. The entire History of Thought
lay before them, and they didn't even understand some of the most basic
principles of logic that we take for granted. In fact, they probably
didn't have a clue about the contributions of classical Greece to higher
learning.
He certainly was charismatic, but from what I've read in the bible about
visions and the like, schizophrenia seemed to be the order of the day. In
his Guide to the Bible, Azimov says he believes Mary to have had multiple
personalities, because she was supposedly possessed by demons, which
supposedly Jesus "cast out." In terms of modern psychiatry, that makes
Jesus a "safe person," around whom Mary's MPD would spontaneously go into
remission. Schizophrenia and religion seem to be so closely intertwined as
to be undistinguishable.
I think you may have subtly misdiagnosed him. If he had a delusion, that
makes him schizophrenic, but if he had a delusion that he was god, that
makes him a particular kind of schizophrenic, which I call
"megalomaniacal," for lack of a better word. He had a God complex, which
you can see around you all the time in modern people.
It can't be denied that he is the single most influential person in human
history, and a lot of that credit is due to the people who followed him.
They are Peter and Paul after his death, and then the subsequent lineage of
popes and cardinals. That credit is due to how people spread what they
interpreted as his message. All that march of history is equally important
as Jesus, of not moreso, and you can't ignore it when talking about the
contributions of one guy.
I think you stopped reading my post after the first sentence.
.
User: "Neil Kelsey"

Title: Re: The Jesus Puzzle 29 Dec 2006 10:33:53 AM
Agent Smith wrote:

"Neil Kelsey" <neil_kelsey@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:1167380387.847462.266480@n51g2000cwc.googlegroups.com:

Subject: Re: The Jesus Puzzle
From: "Neil Kelsey" <neil_kelsey@hotmail.com>
Newsgroups: alt.atheism


Agent Smith wrote:

"Neil Kelsey" <neil_kelsey@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:1167317652.986399.116790@73g2000cwn.googlegroups.com:


Agent Smith wrote:

"Maurice Bastarache" <mauricebast@nb.aibn.com> wrote in
news:k9Dkh.37821$cz.556781@ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca:

This is my first post on this newsgroup, although I have posted
in other newsgroups. Even though my wife is a believer and we
are raising our children as catholics, I have always considered
myself a non believer, although probably more an agnostic than
an athesit.

I have just finished reading The Jesus Puzzle by Earl Doherty. I
don't agree with everything he writes, but he makes some
reasonable and logical points and for the first time I have read
a book on religion that actually makes sense to me. Forget the
Jesus is our saviour and is the son of God sh**...religion and
Jesus and God is essentially a construct of our own fervent
imaginations.


I'm partial to the opinion that Jesus was an *extremely* clever
dude who was in the right place at the right time. It's as much
about his followers as about him. Apparently some of the
disciples went on to do some pretty impressive preaching
themselves.


I'm not impressed.


Go on.


I'll let Bertrand Russell go on, this is an excerpt from his 1927
essay, "Why I Am Not A Christian."


[snip]


I'm still not even convinced Christ existed, although I tend to lean
that way. Otherwise, I like a lot of historical people better than the
character of Christ, Bertrand Russell included. Christ strikes me as a
charismatic schizophrenic when I read the New Testament.


I think that you've got to give the devil his due, and accept the fact that
these people were products of their times.

I agree with that.

The entire History of Thought
lay before them,
and they didn't even understand some of the most basic
principles of logic that we take for granted. In fact, they probably
didn't have a clue about the contributions of classical Greece to higher
learning.

Not sure I agree with that. There are plenty of people today that have
the basic principles of logic and classical Greek knowledge (for
instance) literally sitting in front of them in glowing neon letters
and they choose to ignore them in favour of the supernatural. That
could have been the case for Jesus (and his disciples).

He certainly was charismatic, but from what I've read in the bible about
visions and the like, schizophrenia seemed to be the order of the day.

You mean the order of the day with Jesus, with some of the characters
in the bible, or with the entire Biblical world?

In his Guide to the Bible, Azimov says he believes Mary to have had multiple
personalities, because she was supposedly possessed by demons, which
supposedly Jesus "cast out." In terms of modern psychiatry, that makes
Jesus a "safe person," around whom Mary's MPD would spontaneously go into
remission. Schizophrenia and religion seem to be so closely intertwined as
to be undistinguishable.

I think you may have subtly misdiagnosed him. If he had a delusion, that
makes him schizophrenic, but if he had a delusion that he was god, that
makes him a particular kind of schizophrenic, which I call
"megalomaniacal," for lack of a better word. He had a God complex, which
you can see around you all the time in modern people.

I totally agree. I should have said charismatic megalomaniac
schizophrenic. Charisma and schizophrenia is a volatile combination,
I've seen it first hand with my brother.

It can't be denied that he is the single most influential person in human
history, and a lot of that credit is due to the people who followed him.

Or blame. Agree again, but I'm just now learning the details about his
disciples.

They are Peter and Paul after his death, and then the subsequent lineage of
popes and cardinals. That credit is due to how people spread what they
interpreted as his message. All that march of history is equally important
as Jesus, of not moreso, and you can't ignore it when talking about the
contributions of one guy.

I think you stopped reading my post after the first sentence.

You mean the part about his disciples being impressive preachers? If
that's the case, no. LIke I said, I don't know enough about the history
of the disciples to comment much on that. But I agree with you, they
are vital to the spread of Christianity.
.
User: "Agent Smith"

Title: Re: The Jesus Puzzle 29 Dec 2006 03:34:38 PM
"Neil Kelsey" <neil_kelsey@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:1167410033.082522.127800@73g2000cwn.googlegroups.com:


Agent Smith wrote:

"Neil Kelsey" <neil_kelsey@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:1167380387.847462.266480@n51g2000cwc.googlegroups.com:

Subject: Re: The Jesus Puzzle
From: "Neil Kelsey" <neil_kelsey@hotmail.com>
Newsgroups: alt.atheism


Agent Smith wrote:

"Neil Kelsey" <neil_kelsey@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:1167317652.986399.116790@73g2000cwn.googlegroups.com:


Agent Smith wrote:

"Maurice Bastarache" <mauricebast@nb.aibn.com> wrote in
news:k9Dkh.37821$cz.556781@ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca:

This is my first post on this newsgroup, although I have
posted in other newsgroups. Even though my wife is a believer
and we are raising our children as catholics, I have always
considered myself a non believer, although probably more an
agnostic than an athesit.

I have just finished reading The Jesus Puzzle by Earl
Doherty. I don't agree with everything he writes, but he
makes some reasonable and logical points and for the first
time I have read a book on religion that actually makes sense
to me. Forget the Jesus is our saviour and is the son of God
sh**...religion and Jesus and God is essentially a construct
of our own fervent imaginations.


I'm partial to the opinion that Jesus was an *extremely* clever
dude who was in the right place at the right time. It's as
much about his followers as about him. Apparently some of the
disciples went on to do some pretty impressive preaching
themselves.


I'm not impressed.


Go on.


I'll let Bertrand Russell go on, this is an excerpt from his 1927
essay, "Why I Am Not A Christian."


[snip]


The entire History of Thought lay before them,
and they didn't even understand some of the most basic
principles of logic that we take for granted. In fact, they probably
didn't have a clue about the contributions of classical Greece to
higher learning.


Not sure I agree with that. There are plenty of people today that have
the basic principles of logic and classical Greek knowledge (for
instance) literally sitting in front of them in glowing neon letters
and they choose to ignore them in favour of the supernatural.

Yeah, dumb people. IMO, scientific illiteracy is the largest problem
facing the world today. People try, but they just don't grasp the
general idea about the immutability of natural law. Sometimes it
challenges me, and sometimes it depresses me. You and I are the lucky
ones. Superstition is rampant, and it's all because people don't "get"
science.

He certainly was charismatic, but from what I've read in the bible
about visions and the like, schizophrenia seemed to be the order of
the day.


You mean the order of the day with Jesus, with some of the characters
in the bible, or with the entire Biblical world?

The entire biblical world. Kind of a strange concept isn't it?

In his Guide to the Bible, Azimov says he believes Mary to have had
multiple personalities, because she was supposedly possessed by
demons, which supposedly Jesus "cast out." In terms of modern
psychiatry, that makes Jesus a "safe person," around whom Mary's MPD
would spontaneously go into remission. Schizophrenia and religion
seem to be so closely intertwined as to be undistinguishable.

I think you may have subtly misdiagnosed him. If he had a delusion,
that makes him schizophrenic, but if he had a delusion that he was
god, that makes him a particular kind of schizophrenic, which I call
"megalomaniacal," for lack of a better word. He had a God complex,
which you can see around you all the time in modern people.


I totally agree. I should have said charismatic megalomaniac
schizophrenic. Charisma and schizophrenia is a volatile combination,
I've seen it first hand with my brother.

This sounds like a story worth telling. How would you feel about
sharing the deatils with me?

It can't be denied that he is the single most influential person in
human history, and a lot of that credit is due to the people who
followed him.


Or blame. Agree again, but I'm just now learning the details about his
disciples.

Me too.
.
User: "Neil Kelsey"

Title: Re: The Jesus Puzzle 29 Dec 2006 07:43:33 PM
Agent Smith wrote:

"Neil Kelsey" <neil_kelsey@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:1167410033.082522.127800@73g2000cwn.googlegroups.com:


Agent Smith wrote:

"Neil Kelsey" <neil_kelsey@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:1167380387.847462.266480@n51g2000cwc.googlegroups.com:

Subject: Re: The Jesus Puzzle
From: "Neil Kelsey" <neil_kelsey@hotmail.com>
Newsgroups: alt.atheism


Agent Smith wrote:

"Neil Kelsey" <neil_kelsey@hotmail.com> wrote in
news:1167317652.986399.116790@73g2000cwn.googlegroups.com:


Agent Smith wrote:

"Maurice Bastarache" <mauricebast@nb.aibn.com> wrote in
news:k9Dkh.37821$cz.556781@ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca:

This is my first post on this newsgroup, although I have
posted in other newsgroups. Even though my wife is a believer
and we are raising our children as catholics, I have always
considered myself a non believer, although probably more an
agnostic than an athesit.

I have just finished reading The Jesus Puzzle by Earl
Doherty. I don't agree with everything he writes, but he
makes some reasonable and logical points and for the first
time I have read a book on religion that actually makes sense
to me. Forget the Jesus is our saviour and is the son of God
sh**...religion and Jesus and God is essentially a construct
of our own fervent imaginations.


I'm partial to the opinion that Jesus was an *extremely* clever
dude who was in the right place at the right time. It's as
much about his followers as about him. Apparently some of the
disciples went on to do some pretty impressive preaching
themselves.


I'm not impressed.


Go on.


I'll let Bertrand Russell go on, this is an excerpt from his 1927
essay, "Why I Am Not A Christian."


[snip]


The entire History of Thought lay before them,
and they didn't even understand some of the most basic
principles of logic that we take for granted. In fact, they probably
didn't have a clue about the contributions of classical Greece to
higher learning.


Not sure I agree with that. There are plenty of people today that have
the basic principles of logic and classical Greek knowledge (for
instance) literally sitting in front of them in glowing neon letters
and they choose to ignore them in favour of the supernatural.


Yeah, dumb people. IMO, scientific illiteracy is the largest problem
facing the world today. People try, but they just don't grasp the
general idea about the immutability of natural law. Sometimes it
challenges me, and sometimes it depresses me. You and I are the lucky
ones. Superstition is rampant, and it's all because people don't "get"
science.

He certainly was charismatic, but from what I've read in the bible
about visions and the like, schizophrenia seemed to be the order of
the day.


You mean the order of the day with Jesus, with some of the characters
in the bible, or with the entire Biblical world?


The entire biblical world. Kind of a strange concept isn't it?

In his Guide to the Bible, Azimov says he believes Mary to have had
multiple personalities, because she was supposedly possessed by
demons, which supposedly Jesus "cast out." In terms of modern
psychiatry, that makes Jesus a "safe person," around whom Mary's MPD
would spontaneously go into remission. Schizophrenia and religion
seem to be so closely intertwined as to be undistinguishable.

I think you may have subtly misdiagnosed him. If he had a delusion,
that makes him schizophrenic, but if he had a delusion that he was
god, that makes him a particular kind of schizophrenic, which I call
"megalomaniacal," for lack of a better word. He had a God complex,
which you can see around you all the time in modern people.


I totally agree. I should have said charismatic megalomaniac
schizophrenic. Charisma and schizophrenia is a volatile combination,
I've seen it first hand with my brother.


This sounds like a story worth telling. How would you feel about
sharing the deatils with me?

I don't mind, I just don't know where to start. He's gone from being my
best friend as a teenager to the point where I'd like to kick his *****
from here to Moscow, and I'm a pacifist. I have a brother and a sister,
and both are schizophrenic. One takes medication, the other one
doesn't, and thinks the rest of humanity should take medication,
because he's the only sane person on earth.
This is the same guy who, as a youth, was sent to a special program in
school for advanced students. He is a near concert level classical
pianist (he also played keyboards for a well known rock band in their
early years, playing in arenas in front of thousands of people), he
held the Provincial record for the 100 meter sprint, was an all-star
soccer player. he paints like a master, went to college when he was 16,
and he was completely worshipped by his peers as a teenager. Girls
loved him. I think the mental illness hit in his late teens, and he
became a nightmare. He didn't work his entire adult life and instead
lived off (and terrorized) our mother. He thinks he was looking after
her, but he would bully her beyond belief, physically and
psychologically. She would tell me how sick he was and alternately that
she wished he were dead, or that she were dead. She died last year
after a lengthy illness. I was taking care of her by then (she had
Alzheimer's) and I got to see first hand what my brother was like. We'd
stay in the same house and I could often hear him in a rage, alone in
his bedroom, all night long. He'd punch the walls and swear for hours.
He's attacked many of my/"his" friends, chased my girlfriends off, and
become violent with me. I've had to call the police a few times, and
now we're going through the division of the estate. I realize now that
a lot of his behaviour has been centered around his paranoia regarding
his inheritance, especially concerning me. This is not good. He thinks
he deserves the entire estate because of his unparalelled devotion for
our mother (if he only knew). I can hardly wait for this to be over.
I'm trying to leave out my emotions, and I've left out many incidents,
some so bizarre I'm not sure I have words for them.
After watching the way people reacted to him when he was younger I can
really see how a similar person in an earlier age might have developed
quite a following. My brother became more and more megalomaniacal and
delusional, and would adopt the most bizarre and obscure ideas and
cults he could find. He would tell everyone he knew about whatever it
was with the fervour of a preacher. It seemed to me he could not fit
into the mainstream, even if it made sense, because that would mean
he's following someone/something else, when it was he who should be
followed. If whoever it was didn't immediately roll over and
acknowledge that they had finally heard the truth from the Messiah, he
would become enraged. A few years ago he adopted the Urantia religion
(check that out on the web!) and was trying to sell me on it. I'm
polite and curious, so I listened to him. But when it didn't seem like
I had swallowed his ***** he went mad. I can imagine that 2000 years
ago he would have convinced a lot of people of his delusions, and they
are delusions. I can see how someone like that could be pegged as
divine by the gullible. They're promoting themselves that way and the
born followers are looking for someone to lead them. It can be a deadly
combination.

It can't be denied that he is the single most influential person in
human history, and a lot of that credit is due to the people who
followed him.


Or blame. Agree again, but I'm just now learning the details about his
disciples.


Me too.

.



User: "MarkA"

Title: Re: The Jesus Puzzle 29 Dec 2006 07:07:18 AM
On Fri, 29 Dec 2006 09:41:52 +0000, Agent Smith wrote:


I'm still not even convinced Christ existed, although I tend to lean
that way. Otherwise, I like a lot of historical people better than the
character of Christ, Bertrand Russell included. Christ strikes me as a
charismatic schizophrenic when I read the New Testament.


I think that you've got to give the devil his due, and accept the fact
that these people were products of their times. The entire History of
Thought lay before them, and they didn't even understand some of the most
basic principles of logic that we take for granted. In fact, they
probably didn't have a clue about the contributions of classical Greece to
higher learning.

He certainly was charismatic, but from what I've read in the bible about
visions and the like, schizophrenia seemed to be the order of the day. In
his Guide to the Bible, Azimov says he believes Mary to have had multiple
personalities, because she was supposedly possessed by demons, which
supposedly Jesus "cast out." In terms of modern psychiatry, that makes
Jesus a "safe person," around whom Mary's MPD would spontaneously go into
remission. Schizophrenia and religion seem to be so closely intertwined
as to be undistinguishable.

I think you may have subtly misdiagnosed him. If he had a delusion, that
makes him schizophrenic, but if he had a delusion that he was god, that
makes him a particular kind of schizophrenic, which I call
"megalomaniacal," for lack of a better word. He had a God complex, which
you can see around you all the time in modern people.

It can't be denied that he is the single most influential person in human
history, and a lot of that credit is due to the people who followed him.
They are Peter and Paul after his death, and then the subsequent lineage
of popes and cardinals. That credit is due to how people spread what they
interpreted as his message. All that march of history is equally
important as Jesus, of not moreso, and you can't ignore it when talking
about the contributions of one guy.

I think you stopped reading my post after the first sentence.

I have doubts about the existence of Jesus, also. I suspect that if he
did exist, he was probably more of a political activist, who had some
crude philosophic justifications for his positions. After his execution,
the stories of his life and teachings got embellished to help attract
members to his cult. Over many re-tellings, he became a God with
miraculous powers.
Very likely, this sort of thing happened to prophets/activists of that era
many times. Whether the story of Jesus is a fusion of several such
stories, or a single guy whose early cult got enough traction to form a
self-sustaining religion, is impossible to say at this point.
--
MarkA
(still caught in the maze of twisty little passages, all different)
.
User: "Agent Smith"

Title: Re: The Jesus Puzzle 29 Dec 2006 03:38:41 PM
MarkA <manthony@stopspam.net> wrote in
news:pan.2006.12.29.13.07.17.887992@stopspam.net:

On Fri, 29 Dec 2006 09:41:52 +0000, Agent Smith wrote:



I'm still not even convinced Christ existed, although I tend to lean
that way. Otherwise, I like a lot of historical people better than
the character of Christ, Bertrand Russell included. Christ strikes
me as a charismatic schizophrenic when I read the New Testament.


I think that you've got to give the devil his due, and accept the
fact that these people were products of their times. The entire
History of Thought lay before them, and they didn't even understand
some of the most basic principles of logic that we take for granted.
In fact, they probably didn't have a clue about the contributions of
classical Greece to higher learning.

He certainly was charismatic, but from what I've read in the bible
about visions and the like, schizophrenia seemed to be the order of
the day. In his Guide to the Bible, Azimov says he believes Mary to
have had multiple personalities, because she was supposedly possessed
by demons, which supposedly Jesus "cast out." In terms of modern
psychiatry, that makes Jesus a "safe person," around whom Mary's MPD
would spontaneously go into remission. Schizophrenia and religion
seem to be so closely intertwined as to be undistinguishable.

I think you may have subtly misdiagnosed him. If he had a delusion,
that makes him schizophrenic, but if he had a delusion that he was
god, that makes him a particular kind of schizophrenic, which I call
"megalomaniacal," for lack of a better word. He had a God complex,
which you can see around you all the time in modern people.

It can't be denied that he is the single most influential person in
human history, and a lot of that credit is due to the people who
followed him. They are Peter and Paul after his death, and then the
subsequent lineage of popes and cardinals. That credit is due to how
people spread what they interpreted as his message. All that march
of history is equally important as Jesus, of not moreso, and you
can't ignore it when talking about the contributions of one guy.

I think you stopped reading my post after the first sentence.


I have doubts about the existence of Jesus, also. I suspect that if
he did exist, he was probably more of a political activist, who had
some crude philosophic justifications for his positions.

I think that's a fair analogy. Back then religion and politics were
generally one and the same.

After his
execution, the stories of his life and teachings got embellished to
help attract members to his cult. Over many re-tellings, he became a
God with miraculous powers.
Very likely, this sort of thing happened to prophets/activists of that
era many times. Whether the story of Jesus is a fusion of several
such stories, or a single guy whose early cult got enough traction to
form a self-sustaining religion, is impossible to say at this point.

Well, there are documents, and the synoptic gospels (Matthew, Mark &
Luke) were only written about 30 years after he died.
.

User: "Mike Painter"

Title: Re: The Jesus Puzzle 29 Dec 2006 02:42:48 PM
MarkA wrote:

On Fri, 29 Dec 2006 09:41:52 +0000, Agent Smith wrote:



I have doubts about the existence of Jesus, also. I suspect that if
he did exist, he was probably more of a political activist, who had
some crude philosophic justifications for his positions. After his
execution, the stories of his life and teachings got embellished to
help attract members to his cult. Over many re-tellings, he became a
God with miraculous powers.

Very likely, this sort of thing happened to prophets/activists of
that era many times. Whether the story of Jesus is a fusion of
several such stories, or a single guy whose early cult got enough
traction to form a self-sustaining religion, is impossible to say at
this point.

The problem with that is that history does record what happened to such
people and their followers. Christ's alleged prediction of the denial by
Peter would seem to show that the writer was aware of what happened to these
people.
The leader and all the followers were killed by the Romans. They had
committed treason and no one was going to let the leader or any follower
live.
It's been suggested that his execution may have come about as a result of
his insane actions in the temple fore court. Money changers and the rest
were essential parts of the religion and proper sacrifice could not be made
without them.
.
User: "Agent Smith"

Title: Re: The Jesus Puzzle 29 Dec 2006 04:35:20 PM
"Mike Painter" <mddotpainter@sbcglobal.net> wrote in
news:c5flh.3986$x67.1140@newssvr17.news.prodigy.net:

MarkA wrote:

On Fri, 29 Dec 2006 09:41:52 +0000, Agent Smith wrote:

I have doubts about the existence of Jesus, also. I suspect that if
he did exist, he was probably more of a political activist, who had
some crude philosophic justifications for his positions. After his
execution, the stories of his life and teachings got embellished to
help attract members to his cult. Over many re-tellings, he became a
God with miraculous powers.

Very likely, this sort of thing happened to prophets/activists of
that era many times. Whether the story of Jesus is a fusion of
several such stories, or a single guy whose early cult got enough
traction to form a self-sustaining religion, is impossible to say at
this point.


The problem with that is that history does record what happened to
such people and their followers. Christ's alleged prediction of the
denial by Peter would seem to show that the writer was aware of what
happened to these people.

The leader and all the followers were killed by the Romans. They had
committed treason and no one was going to let the leader or any
follower live.

Only the leader had committed treason. You can't go killing groups of
people willy nilly and expect civil order to reign. Besides, Peter
denied him and Judas betrayed him, and in doing so, they may have saved
all the Apostles.
How 'bout that? I just rescued Judas from his place in Satan's maw in
the deepest bowels of Hell.

It's been suggested that his execution may have come about as a result
of his insane actions in the temple fore court. Money changers and the
rest were essential parts of the religion and proper sacrifice could
not be made without them.

Yes, this is true.
.
User: "Mike Painter"

Title: Re: The Jesus Puzzle 29 Dec 2006 06:13:10 PM
Agent Smith wrote:

"Mike Painter" <mddotpainter@sbcglobal.net> wrote in
news:c5flh.3986$x67.1140@newssvr17.news.prodigy.net:

<snip>


Only the leader had committed treason. You can't go killing groups of
people willy nilly and expect civil order to reign. Besides, Peter
denied him and Judas betrayed him, and in doing so, they may have
saved all the Apostles.

I can't, the Romans did in fact do exactly that.

It's been suggested that his execution may have come about as a
result of his insane actions in the temple fore court. Money
changers and the rest were essential parts of the religion and
proper sacrifice could not be made without them.


Yes, this is true.

.








User: "sceptborg"

Title: Re: The Jesus Puzzle 28 Dec 2006 04:45:03 AM
Agent Smith wrote:

I'm partial to the opinion that Jesus was an *extremely* clever dude who
was in the right place at the right time. It's as much about his
followers as about him. Apparently some of the disciples went on to do
some pretty impressive preaching themselves.

Where did you get reliable information to form this opinion?
.
User: "Agent Smith"

Title: Re: The Jesus Puzzle 28 Dec 2006 06:47:56 AM
sceptborg <thereisnone@fakeisp.com> wrote in news:45939DBE.4D4BAD04
@fakeisp.com:

Agent Smith wrote:

I'm partial to the opinion that Jesus was an *extremely* clever dude who
was in the right place at the right time. It's as much about his
followers as about him. Apparently some of the disciples went on to do
some pretty impressive preaching themselves.


Where did you get reliable information to form this opinion?

Prometheus Books sells a volume on the topic. One would suppose that it's
voice is outweighed by the existence of actual historical documents from
the time. I can see rebelling against Christ, but that is going a little
too far.
.
User: "Christopher A.Lee"

Title: Re: The Jesus Puzzle 28 Dec 2006 07:19:28 AM
On Thu, 28 Dec 2006 12:47:56 GMT, Agent Smith
<agent-smith@two-blocks-on-your-left.com> wrote:

sceptborg <thereisnone@fakeisp.com> wrote in news:45939DBE.4D4BAD04
@fakeisp.com:

Agent Smith wrote:

I'm partial to the opinion that Jesus was an *extremely* clever dude who
was in the right place at the right time. It's as much about his
followers as about him. Apparently some of the disciples went on to do
some pretty impressive preaching themselves.


Where did you get reliable information to form this opinion?


Prometheus Books sells a volume on the topic. One would suppose that it's
voice is outweighed by the existence of actual historical documents from
the time. I can see rebelling against Christ, but that is going a little
too far.

What "actual historical documents from the time"? There is nothing
secular to confirm any of the religious propaganda.
Feel free to demonstrate that there was an historical Jesus before
lying about people rebelling against what is merely a figment of the
beliefs of somebody else's religion.
.

User: "Uncle Vic"

Title: Re: The Jesus Puzzle 28 Dec 2006 12:10:29 PM
Once upon a time in alt.atheism, dear sweet Agent Smith
(agent-smith@two-blocks-on-your-left.com) made the light shine upon us
with this:

sceptborg <thereisnone@fakeisp.com> wrote in news:45939DBE.4D4BAD04
@fakeisp.com:

Agent Smith wrote:

I'm partial to the opinion that Jesus was an *extremely* clever dude
who was in the right place at the right time. It's as much about
his followers as about him. Apparently some of the disciples went
on to do some pretty impressive preaching themselves.


Where did you get reliable information to form this opinion?


Prometheus Books sells a volume on the topic. One would suppose that
it's voice is outweighed by the existence of actual historical
documents from the time. I can see rebelling against Christ, but that
is going a little too far.

I can imagine there would have been hundreds of over-zealous preachers
from that era. Perhaps "Jesus" is a compilation who was given the Greek
pagan nomenclature "christ", meaning "anointed one".
There is no secular evidence that points to the existence of a holy man
by that name.
--
Uncle Vic
aa Atheist #2011
Supervisor, EAC Department of little adhesive-backed "L" shaped
chrome-plastic doo-dads to add feet to Jesus fish department.
Proud member of Earthquack's "Ghost fulla holes" convict page
.
User: "Agent Smith"

Title: Re: The Jesus Puzzle 29 Dec 2006 02:08:49 AM
Uncle Vic <address@withheld.com> wrote in
news:Xns98A7677E43C75vicman@66.250.146.128:

Once upon a time in alt.atheism, dear sweet Agent Smith
(agent-smith@two-blocks-on-your-left.com) made the light shine upon us
with this:

sceptborg <thereisnone@fakeisp.com> wrote in news:45939DBE.4D4BAD04
@fakeisp.com:

Agent Smith wrote:

I'm partial to the opinion that Jesus was an *extremely* clever
dude who was in the right place at the right time. It's as much
about his followers as about him. Apparently some of the disciples
went on to do some pretty impressive preaching themselves.


Where did you get reliable information to form this opinion?


Prometheus Books sells a volume on the topic. One would suppose that
it's voice is outweighed by the existence of actual historical
documents from the time. I can see rebelling against Christ, but
that is going a little too far.


I can imagine there would have been hundreds of over-zealous preachers
from that era. Perhaps "Jesus" is a compilation who was given the
Greek pagan nomenclature "christ", meaning "anointed one".

There is no secular evidence that points to the existence of a holy
man by that name.

So you don't accept scripture as evidence for the existence of specific
individuals. If you look at it, parts of it are just long family
lineages. How is it not obvious that it is a historical record to at
least that degree.
.
User: "Mike Painter"

Title: Re: The Jesus Puzzle 29 Dec 2006 02:36:01 PM
Agent Smith wrote:

Uncle Vic <address@withheld.com> wrote in
news:Xns98A7677E43C75vicman@66.250.146.128:

<snip>

I can imagine there would have been hundreds of over-zealous
preachers from that era. Perhaps "Jesus" is a compilation who was
given the Greek pagan nomenclature "christ", meaning "anointed one".

There is no secular evidence that points to the existence of a holy
man by that name.


So you don't accept scripture as evidence for the existence of
specific individuals. If you look at it, parts of it are just long
family lineages. How is it not obvious that it is a historical
record to at least that degree.

The superb Farmer biography of Doc Savage includes a fairly extensive
genealogical table for both sides of his family extending back several
hundred years.
Does that make it historical?
What information is there outside the bible that determines that any
versions of these lists are valid? genealogical
.
User: "Agent Smith"

Title: Re: The Jesus Puzzle 29 Dec 2006 04:36:59 PM
"Mike Painter" <mddotpainter@sbcglobal.net> wrote in news:Q_elh.3984
$x67.3527@newssvr17.news.prodigy.net:

Agent Smith wrote:

Uncle Vic <address@withheld.com> wrote in
news:Xns98A7677E43C75vicman@66.250.146.128:

<snip>

I can imagine there would have been hundreds of over-zealous
preachers from that era. Perhaps "Jesus" is a compilation who was
given the Greek pagan nomenclature "christ", meaning "anointed one".

There is no secular evidence that points to the existence of a holy
man by that name.


So you don't accept scripture as evidence for the existence of
specific individuals. If you look at it, parts of it are just long
family lineages. How is it not obvious that it is a historical
record to at least that degree.


The superb Farmer biography of Doc Savage includes a fairly extensive
genealogical table for both sides of his family extending back several
hundred years.
Does that make it historical?

Do you have reason to suppose that Farmer's data is bad. Some people
are obsessed by genealogical research.
.
User: "Mike Painter"

Title: Re: The Jesus Puzzle 29 Dec 2006 06:26:51 PM
Agent Smith wrote:

"Mike Painter" <mddotpainter@sbcglobal.net> wrote in news:Q_elh.3984
$x67.3527@newssvr17.news.prodigy.net:

Agent Smith wrote:

Uncle Vic <address@withheld.com> wrote in
news:Xns98A7677E43C75vicman@66.250.146.128:

<snip>

I can imagine there would have been hundreds of over-zealous
preachers from that era. Perhaps "Jesus" is a compilation who was
given the Greek pagan nomenclature "christ", meaning "anointed
one".

There is no secular evidence that points to the existence of a holy
man by that name.


So you don't accept scripture as evidence for the existence of
specific individuals. If you look at it, parts of it are just long
family lineages. How is it not obvious that it is a historical
record to at least that degree.


The superb Farmer biography of Doc Savage includes a fairly extensive
genealogical table for both sides of his family extending back
several hundred years.
Does that make it historical?


Do you have reason to suppose that Farmer's data is bad. Some people
are obsessed by genealogical research.

I personally suspect that the chart is as valid as the ones in the bible and
have the same value.
500 years from now some body reading both books might make the same
assessment.
The information included on Lester Dent adds to the veracity and as most her
know Philip Jose Farmer's work is fantastic.
.



User: "Uncle Vic"

Title: Re: The Jesus Puzzle 29 Dec 2006 01:23:11 PM
One fine day in alt.atheism, Agent Smith <agent-smith@two-blocks-on-your-
left.com> bloodied us up with this:

Uncle Vic <address@withheld.com> wrote in
news:Xns98A7677E43C75vicman@66.250.146.128:

Once upon a time in alt.atheism, dear sweet Agent Smith
(agent-smith@two-blocks-on-your-left.com) made the light shine upon us
with this:

sceptborg <thereisnone@fakeisp.com> wrote in news:45939DBE.4D4BAD04
@fakeisp.com:

Agent Smith wrote:

I'm partial to the opinion that Jesus was an *extremely* clever
dude who was in the right place at the right time. It's as much
about his followers as about him. Apparently some of the disciples
went on to do some pretty impressive preaching themselves.


Where did you get reliable information to form this opinion?


Prometheus Books sells a volume on the topic. One would suppose that
it's voice is outweighed by the existence of actual historical
documents from the time. I can see rebelling against Christ, but
that is going a little too far.


I can imagine there would have been hundreds of over-zealous preachers
from that era. Perhaps "Jesus" is a compilation who was given the
Greek pagan nomenclature "christ", meaning "anointed one".

There is no secular evidence that points to the existence of a holy
man by that name.


So you don't accept scripture as evidence for the existence of specific
individuals. If you look at it, parts of it are just long family
lineages. How is it not obvious that it is a historical record to at
least that degree.

I have my doubts when one person is a long family lineage.
--
Uncle Vic
aa Atheist #2011
Supervisor, EAC Department of little adhesive-backed "L" shaped
chrome-plastic doo-dads to add feet to Jesus fish department.
Proud member of Earthquack's "Ghost fulla holes" convict page
.
User: "Agent Smith"

Title: Re: The Jesus Puzzle 29 Dec 2006 03:28:38 PM
Uncle Vic <address@withheld.com> wrote in
news:Xns98A873D65E9C2vicman@66.250.146.128:

One fine day in alt.atheism, Agent Smith
<agent-smith@two-blocks-on-your- left.com> bloodied us up with this:

Uncle Vic <address@withheld.com> wrote in
news:Xns98A7677E43C75vicman@66.250.146.128:

Once upon a time in alt.atheism, dear sweet Agent Smith
(agent-smith@two-blocks-on-your-left.com) made the light shine upon
us with this:

sceptborg <thereisnone@fakeisp.com> wrote in news:45939DBE.4D4BAD04
@fakeisp.com:

Agent Smith wrote:

I'm partial to the opinion that Jesus was an *extremely* clever
dude who was in the right place at the right time. It's as much
about his followers as about him. Apparently some of the
disciples went on to do some pretty impressive preaching
themselves.


Where did you get reliable information to form this opinion?


Prometheus Books sells a volume on the topic. One would suppose
that it's voice is outweighed by the existence of actual historical
documents from the time. I can see rebelling against Christ, but
that is going a little too far.


I can imagine there would have been hundreds of over-zealous
preachers from that era. Perhaps "Jesus" is a compilation who was
given the Greek pagan nomenclature "christ", meaning "anointed one".

There is no secular evidence that points to the existence of a holy
man by that name.


So you don't accept scripture as evidence for the existence of
specific individuals. If you look at it, parts of it are just long
family lineages. How is it not obvious that it is a historical
record to at least that degree.


I have my doubts when one person is a long family lineage.

I don't know what that means, but it is worth knowing that those extreme
ages given in the old testament are measured in months, not years. If
you divide by 12 (or is it 13), they come out to very sensible numbers.
.
User: "Uncle Vic"

Title: Re: The Jesus Puzzle 29 Dec 2006 08:44:02 PM
One fine day in alt.atheism, Agent Smith
<agent-smith@two-blocks-on-your-left.com> bloodied us up with this:

Uncle Vic <address@withheld.com> wrote in
news:Xns98A873D65E9C2vicman@66.250.146.128:

One fine day in alt.atheism, Agent Smith
<agent-smith@two-blocks-on-your- left.com> bloodied us up with this:

Uncle Vic <address@withheld.com> wrote in
news:Xns98A7677E43C75vicman@66.250.146.128:

Once upon a time in alt.atheism, dear sweet Agent Smith
(agent-smith@two-blocks-on-your-left.com) made the light shine upon
us with this:

sceptborg <thereisnone@fakeisp.com> wrote in
news:45939DBE.4D4BAD04 @fakeisp.com:

Agent Smith wrote:

I'm partial to the opinion that Jesus was an *extremely* clever
dude who was in the right place at the right time. It's as much
about his followers as about him. Apparently some of the
disciples went on to do some pretty impressive preaching
themselves.


Where did you get reliable information to form this opinion?


Prometheus Books sells a volume on the topic. One would suppose
that it's voice is outweighed by the existence of actual
historical documents from the time. I can see rebelling against
Christ, but that is going a little too far.


I can imagine there would have been hundreds of over-zealous
preachers from that era. Perhaps "Jesus" is a compilation who was
given the Greek pagan nomenclature "christ", meaning "anointed
one".

There is no secular evidence that points to the existence of a holy
man by that name.


So you don't accept scripture as evidence for the existence of
specific individuals. If you look at it, parts of it are just long
family lineages. How is it not obvious that it is a historical
record to at least that degree.


I have my doubts when one person is a long family lineage.


I don't know what that means, but it is worth knowing that those
extreme ages given in the old testament are measured in months, not
years. If you divide by 12 (or is it 13), they come out to very
sensible numbers.

Except for he fact that it says "years". (example: Gen. 7:11)
Why do you try to rationalize the ***** in the bible by lying about
it?
--
Uncle Vic
aa Atheist #2011
Supervisor, EAC Department of little adhesive-backed "L" shaped
chrome-plastic doo-dads to add feet to Jesus fish department.
Proud member of Earthquack's "Ghost fulla holes" convict page
.
User: "Mike Painter"

Title: Re: The Jesus Puzzle 29 Dec 2006 09:12:22 PM
Uncle Vic wrote:

I have my doubts when one person is a long family lineage.


I don't know what that means, but it is worth knowing that those
extreme ages given in the old testament are measured in months, not
years. If you divide by 12 (or is it 13), they come out to very
sensible numbers.


Except for he fact that it says "years". (example: Gen. 7:11)

Why do you try to rationalize the ***** in the bible by lying about
it?

It's karlmath, where the mean and median are the same.
Or maybe it's Humpty Dumpty math where numbers mean what I want them to.
"True age" = Bible age/ x
where x is 12 or 13 when the people are said to live to 900 years but some
value approaching 1 when they are said to have lived 50 years and had
grandchildren..
.








User: "MarkA"

Title: Re: The Jesus Puzzle 28 Dec 2006 01:52:14 PM
On Thu, 28 Dec 2006 08:15:13 +0000, Agent Smith wrote:

"Maurice Bastarache" <mauricebast@nb.aibn.com> wrote in
news:k9Dkh.37821$cz.556781@ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca:

This is my first post on this newsgroup, although I have posted in other
newsgroups. Even though my wife is a believer and we are raising our
children as catholics, I have always considered myself a non believer,
although probably more an agnostic than an athesit.

I have just finished reading The Jesus Puzzle by Earl Doherty. I don't
agree with everything he writes, but he makes some reasonable and
logical points and for the first time I have read a book on religion
that actually makes sense to me. Forget the Jesus is our saviour and is
the son of God sh**...religion and Jesus and God is essentially a
construct of our own fervent imaginations.


I'm partial to the opinion that Jesus was an *extremely* clever dude who
was in the right place at the right time. It's as much about his
followers as about him. Apparently some of the disciples went on to do
some pretty impressive preaching themselves.

Anyone who wants to see a very incisive dramatization of how religions get
started should watch the movie, "The Life of Brian." Though it is written
as a comedy, I believe it is a very accurate portrayal of how people
really behave.
--
MarkA
(still caught in the maze of twisty little passages, all different)
.
User: "Maurice Bastarache"

Title: Re: The Jesus Puzzle 28 Dec 2006 05:07:02 PM
Hehehehe...I agree. Or listen to "There is no God" by George Carlin. The man
is brilliant. Everything he says is bang on.
M
Anyone who wants to see a very incisive dramatization of how religions get

started should watch the movie, "The Life of Brian." Though it is written
as a comedy, I believe it is a very accurate portrayal of how people
really behave.

--
MarkA
(still caught in the maze of twisty little passages, all different)

.

User: "Agent Smith"

Title: Re: The Jesus Puzzle 29 Dec 2006 02:12:00 AM
MarkA <manthony@stopspam.net> wrote in
news:pan.2006.12.28.19.52.14.949146@stopspam.net:

On Thu, 28 Dec 2006 08:15:13 +0000, Agent Smith wrote:

"Maurice Bastarache" <mauricebast@nb.aibn.com> wrote in
news:k9Dkh.37821$cz.556781@ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca:

This is my first post on this newsgroup, although I have posted in
other newsgroups. Even though my wife is a believer and we are
raising our children as catholics, I have always considered myself a
non believer, although probably more an agnostic than an athesit.

I have just finished reading The Jesus Puzzle by Earl Doherty. I
don't agree with everything he writes, but he makes some reasonable
and logical points and for the first time I have read a book on
religion that actually makes sense to me. Forget the Jesus is our
saviour and is the son of God sh**...religion and Jesus and God is
essentially a construct of our own fervent imaginations.


I'm partial to the opinion that Jesus was an *extremely* clever dude
who was in the right place at the right time. It's as much about his
followers as about him. Apparently some of the disciples went on to
do some pretty impressive preaching themselves.


Anyone who wants to see a very incisive dramatization of how religions
get started should watch the movie, "The Life of Brian." Though it is
written as a comedy, I believe it is a very accurate portrayal of how
people really behave.

I agree. There are some really deep insights into the origins of
religion in that film. And the way they mock human stupidty in the
process is priceless.
.


User: "Michael Gray"

Title: Re: The Jesus Puzzle 28 Dec 2006 03:47:46 AM
On Thu, 28 Dec 2006 08:15:13 GMT, Agent Smith
<agent-smith@two-blocks-on-your-left.com> wrote:
- Refer: <Xns98A7211953D1Fagentsmithtwoblockso@207.115.17.102>

"Maurice Bastarache" <mauricebast@nb.aibn.com> wrote in
news:k9Dkh.37821$cz.556781@ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca:

This is my first post on this newsgroup, although I have posted in
other newsgroups. Even though my wife is a believer and we are raising
our children as catholics, I have always considered myself a non
believer, although probably more an agnostic than an athesit.

I have just finished reading The Jesus Puzzle by Earl Doherty. I don't
agree with everything he writes, but he makes some reasonable and
logical points and for the first time I have read a book on religion
that actually makes sense to me. Forget the Jesus is our saviour and
is the son of God sh**...religion and Jesus and God is essentially a
construct of our own fervent imaginations.


I'm partial to the opinion that Jesus was an *extremely* clever dude who
was in the right place at the right time. It's as much about his
followers as about him. Apparently some of the disciples went on to do
some pretty impressive preaching themselves.

But every bit of available evidence clearly points to his being a
fabrication.
--
.


User: "Greywolf"

Title: Re: The Jesus Puzzle 27 Dec 2006 06:24:42 PM
"Maurice Bastarache" <mauricebast@nb.aibn.com> wrote in message
news:k9Dkh.37821$cz.556781@ursa-nb00s0.nbnet.nb.ca...

This is my first post on this newsgroup, although I have posted in other
newsgroups. Even though my wife is a believer and we are raising our
children as catholics, I have always considered myself a non believer,
although probably more an agnostic than an athesit.

I have just finished reading The Jesus Puzzle by Earl Doherty. I don't
agree with everything he writes, but he makes some reasonable and logical
points and for the first time I have read a book on religion that actually
makes sense to me. Forget the Jesus is our saviour and is the son of God
sh**...religion and Jesus and God is essentially a construct of our own
fervent imaginations.

There..I said it...lol

M


You, brave heart, are well on your way to removing the shackles of religious
brainwashing and control that have bound you for far too long! It is a
self-serving clergy that has deluded you. And in short order, you'll fully
realize to what extent you were 'hoodwinked' by them, too. And don't you
doubt these words for a moment. We atheists have the 'truth' firmly in hand.
The Jesus/God 'stuff' the clergy has ladled out to you by the gallon-full is
pure nonsense and rightfully belongs in the realm of fiction. Think about
it. After all this time, not a single theist that has *ever* existed has
been able to exhibit their 'God' to mankind in a way that would *truly*
demonstrate that he exists beyond any doubt. Not a *one*! How does the
clergy account for this mind-numbing fact? Well, one must have 'faith' he
exists, we are told? Some 'proof', isn't it? All 'smoke and mirrors' with a
large dose of *wanting* to believe in the ridiculous, preposterous, and the
absurd. *That's* what the clergy actually present us. And do I need mention
that 'religion' is also a lucrative 'business' as well?
As for raising your children 'Catholic': You and your wife are their parents
and will raise them in the manner you two agree upon. But take into account
that their artificial 'faith' *may* be exploited somewhere down the line for
nefarious 'gain'.
It is just one man's suggestion here. But perhaps your children could be
brought up to think of 'God' as a type of 'Santa Claus'