Many times when the teachings of Jesus and his person are discussed, reference is made to a particular interpretation of what his words may be indicating. For example, I have read a discussion about a Jesus who denies or contradicts the Law of Moses. But that is an incorrect way of understanding Jesus, just like a political Jesus is or one who does not admit rich people among his followers, as if honest possessions were sin.
Can those who debate the teachings of Jesus at least begin to ascertain that the Jesus they suppose is the one that Scripture shows us and not an imaginary Jesus?
This topic is to analyze the need to be serious in the use of terms and premises, so that the debates adjust to the truth, and the conclusions are more accurate.
What is the Jesus you have in mind? Does it correspond to the Jesus of the Bible? Can you really know what Jesus was like?
The Jesus to whom atheists and others often refer
Moderator: Moderators
- oldbadger
- Guru
- Posts: 1868
- Joined: Sun Dec 30, 2012 11:11 am
- Has thanked: 321 times
- Been thanked: 238 times
Re: The Jesus to whom atheists and others often refer
Post #31Yes! Moses was, but that was hundreds and hundreds and hundreds of years before, when the children of Israel were trying to survive as they wandered...together, as one. When a person like Jesus is hammering for a return to the laws there would have been folks...enemies, who wanted to pick holes wherever they could, and....Wow! .....so many examples of that.
That's the sort of picking that a Pharisee or any other enemy would have chosen, desperate to keep far far away from the poor laws laid down by Moses. Jesus really hated the hypocrites...said so often.Which must mean that it wasn't work?
I wouldn't know, I'm a Deist, believing in a totally disinterested and uninvolved Deity!So, is God convinced by a tu quoque fallacy, too?
I believe those laws were writ large by very very clever men, who knew what they were at, after the Exodus. Even Kings were busting them later on.
Although all the gospels contain valuable anecdotes, accounts and other info, I don't pay much attention to Luke, Matthew or John because they definitely were not there, two copying G-Mark and one not having a clue about the timeline or the most amazing events of disciple John's life.Some of the words and actions attributed to him by some of the authors, anyway.
But many words and actions..... yes, I take notice of those.
-
- Guru
- Posts: 2343
- Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2016 8:40 am
- Has thanked: 2005 times
- Been thanked: 781 times
Re: The Jesus to whom atheists and others often refer
Post #32I long for the days of yore when we had tokens to giveth. This reply would have emptied my coffers and you would be scrooge mcducking in tokens:
The fact that someone thinks they know the real Jesus based on scripture and us atheists haven't a clue because we are unaware of the scripture is delicious irony to be sure.
- oldbadger
- Guru
- Posts: 1868
- Joined: Sun Dec 30, 2012 11:11 am
- Has thanked: 321 times
- Been thanked: 238 times
Re: The Jesus to whom atheists and others often refer
Post #33Some of the very best HJ students/scholars seem (to me) to be atheist and agnostic researchers.benchwarmer wrote: ↑Fri May 20, 2022 4:50 pm The fact that someone thinks they know the real Jesus based on scripture and us atheists haven't a clue because we are unaware of the scripture is delicious irony to be sure.
-
- Banned
- Posts: 1775
- Joined: Wed Aug 07, 2019 9:31 pm
- Has thanked: 43 times
- Been thanked: 213 times
- Contact:
Re: The Jesus to whom atheists and others often refer
Post #34I remember reading on the internet the following true story:
the daughter of a famous English writer had a modern English literature exam at her school, where no one knew that she was the daughter of the writer of the book from which an exam question was taken. She asked her father to explain the central idea in the book to help her answer the question. It turned out that when the daughter answered the exam, the teacher told her that she was wrong in her answer and gave her a totally different version about the central idea of the writer in his book ... without even suspecting that the wrong one was himself, for logical reasons.
When atheists try to create a character for themselves based on the things they read about Jesus in the Bible, they are already assuming preconceived ideas... They are often very wrong, and do not pay attention to those who do have an idea of the real person behind the stories because they have made the study of the Bible an essential matter for their own lives. Some imagine a political or revolutionary Jesus, others imagine just a very intelligent man who had a few followers, others imagine God walking among humans, etc.
The issue of who one believes Jesus to be was as topical at the time Jesus served as God's spokesman as it is now. He himself asked his disciples what opinion they had of him (Matt. 16:13-20; Mark 8:27-30; Luke 9:18-21). We now have various accounts of his life and work and can have a more complete notion... only if those accounts are carefully studied.
the daughter of a famous English writer had a modern English literature exam at her school, where no one knew that she was the daughter of the writer of the book from which an exam question was taken. She asked her father to explain the central idea in the book to help her answer the question. It turned out that when the daughter answered the exam, the teacher told her that she was wrong in her answer and gave her a totally different version about the central idea of the writer in his book ... without even suspecting that the wrong one was himself, for logical reasons.
When atheists try to create a character for themselves based on the things they read about Jesus in the Bible, they are already assuming preconceived ideas... They are often very wrong, and do not pay attention to those who do have an idea of the real person behind the stories because they have made the study of the Bible an essential matter for their own lives. Some imagine a political or revolutionary Jesus, others imagine just a very intelligent man who had a few followers, others imagine God walking among humans, etc.
The issue of who one believes Jesus to be was as topical at the time Jesus served as God's spokesman as it is now. He himself asked his disciples what opinion they had of him (Matt. 16:13-20; Mark 8:27-30; Luke 9:18-21). We now have various accounts of his life and work and can have a more complete notion... only if those accounts are carefully studied.
-
- Guru
- Posts: 2343
- Joined: Mon Jun 06, 2016 8:40 am
- Has thanked: 2005 times
- Been thanked: 781 times
Re: The Jesus to whom atheists and others often refer
Post #35When SOME atheists ... (there I fixed that for you)Eloi wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 3:49 pm When atheists try to create a character for themselves based on the things they read about Jesus in the Bible, they are already assuming preconceived ideas... They are often very wrong, and do not pay attention to those who do have an idea of the real person behind the stories because they have made the study of the Bible an essential matter for their own lives. Some imagine a political or revolutionary Jesus, others imagine just a very intelligent man who had a few followers, others imagine God walking among humans, etc.
You do realize that many atheists, especially on this debate site, are former devout Christians right? Atheists actually have an advantage in a way when approaching the Bible. We don't have to make things line up with the preconceived ideas that are fed to Christians from the pulpit. We are free to analyze the data and try to find the best fit for what is written rather than trying to shoe horn it all into one image.
The very fact that there are so many denominations of Christianity tells us that Christians themselves (including me when I was one) are not harmonized on the full picture of who Jesus was and what is taught based on the words attributed to him in the Bible.
When one takes off the rose colored glasses, it becomes much more fascinating discovering the 'struggles' each author was trying to overcome by trying to set the record straight with their version of the gospel message. The fact that Christians bound these documents all together into a collection is not the fault of the authors and whatever message they were really trying to convey and/or correct from previous writings.
As Difflugia pointed out so succinctly, there are actually many Jesuses to choose from if going strictly by what is written. It is only those who insist that the various views of these writers have to be harmonized (based on faith) that really have the issue.
I have no problem admitting that I don't know who the real Jesus was (or if there was even one as fully described by any one of the authors). I do, however, find it a little odd that some Christians will claim to know more about it when clearly they really don't. After all, all we have are the Bible texts and if so inclined, faith. Anyone who has further, verifiable evidence about who the 'real' Jesus was is free to present whatever they got. I'm sure we will all (on both sides) find it interesting.
-
- Banned
- Posts: 1775
- Joined: Wed Aug 07, 2019 9:31 pm
- Has thanked: 43 times
- Been thanked: 213 times
- Contact:
Re: The Jesus to whom atheists and others often refer
Post #36[Replying to benchwarmer in post #2]
My topic is not partisan at all... I could talk about a totally invented Jesus on the part of atheists as well as on the part of religionists, whether they are Christians, Jews, Muslims, or any other religion. In my topic I raise the need for dialogue in order to know who Jesus really is, how he acted, what he taught, how he lived, etc, according to the stories that we do actually have about him... not to ideas that may have been teaching us in a traditional way, or purely invented with specific intentions.
My topic is not partisan at all... I could talk about a totally invented Jesus on the part of atheists as well as on the part of religionists, whether they are Christians, Jews, Muslims, or any other religion. In my topic I raise the need for dialogue in order to know who Jesus really is, how he acted, what he taught, how he lived, etc, according to the stories that we do actually have about him... not to ideas that may have been teaching us in a traditional way, or purely invented with specific intentions.
-
- Savant
- Posts: 8178
- Joined: Thu Apr 29, 2021 8:05 am
- Has thanked: 957 times
- Been thanked: 3549 times
Re: The Jesus to whom atheists and others often refer
Post #37I agree, But you appear far too eager to assume that atheists are wrong in their assessment of Jesus. Already there is a long history of doubters who simply cannot accept some of the claims for Jesus made in the gospels, and my position is that it can be proven that Some are demonstrably incorrect (the nativities) some are contradictory (the resurrections) and so arre open to doubt, and some sound like tall stories (the shekel -eating fish) and the more stuff claimed for Jesus that we see reason to reject, the more we wonder: "Just how much of it is true - if any?"
The mainstream view that the Real Jesus is pretty much as depicted in the gospels (give or take the miracles) is why atheists are considered to be wrong. Not because they do not have a sound and solid case for doubting the gospel story, but because trusting the Bible has been peddled for years and years and doubters are finding it hard to get a serious hearing or platform, for all they have the far better case.
For me, the debate is not about whether the Bible and Gospel Jesus is correct, but about why the massive perception is that it is reliable and believable. There's a video (Tracie Harris - religious family values) which shows just how Religion has a massive PR ongoing when it has been knocked back so many times that it ought to have no more credibility than flat earth or Astrology. Yet is still thought to be Good to have Faith, to bring children up in a religion, and to attend church. Why? Jesus himself said that it is better to get together to do the Work of picking up litter than to attend church. But a group that announced this would be greeted with horror "Preach against church attendance? These people must be anti social." "Teach critical thinking rather than the Bible? What are they going to do with our kids, turn them into mindless robots?" I can feel the background social revulsion against this myself, and I don't know where it comes from.
One day we may understand the social and tribal instincts that underpin Authority and social custom, conformity and the concept of insiders and outsiders. Right now all we can do is keep arguing and pushing what is on evidence, true, never mind that most people don't want to hear it.
The mainstream view that the Real Jesus is pretty much as depicted in the gospels (give or take the miracles) is why atheists are considered to be wrong. Not because they do not have a sound and solid case for doubting the gospel story, but because trusting the Bible has been peddled for years and years and doubters are finding it hard to get a serious hearing or platform, for all they have the far better case.
For me, the debate is not about whether the Bible and Gospel Jesus is correct, but about why the massive perception is that it is reliable and believable. There's a video (Tracie Harris - religious family values) which shows just how Religion has a massive PR ongoing when it has been knocked back so many times that it ought to have no more credibility than flat earth or Astrology. Yet is still thought to be Good to have Faith, to bring children up in a religion, and to attend church. Why? Jesus himself said that it is better to get together to do the Work of picking up litter than to attend church. But a group that announced this would be greeted with horror "Preach against church attendance? These people must be anti social." "Teach critical thinking rather than the Bible? What are they going to do with our kids, turn them into mindless robots?" I can feel the background social revulsion against this myself, and I don't know where it comes from.
One day we may understand the social and tribal instincts that underpin Authority and social custom, conformity and the concept of insiders and outsiders. Right now all we can do is keep arguing and pushing what is on evidence, true, never mind that most people don't want to hear it.
- oldbadger
- Guru
- Posts: 1868
- Joined: Sun Dec 30, 2012 11:11 am
- Has thanked: 321 times
- Been thanked: 238 times
Re: The Jesus to whom atheists and others often refer
Post #38I enjoyed that.Eloi wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 3:49 pm I remember reading on the internet the following true story:
the daughter of a famous English writer had a modern English literature exam at her school, where no one knew that she was the daughter of the writer of the book from which an exam question was taken. She asked her father to explain the central idea in the book to help her answer the question. It turned out that when the daughter answered the exam, the teacher told her that she was wrong in her answer and gave her a totally different version about the central idea of the writer in his book ... without even suspecting that the wrong one was himself, for logical reasons.
This may be true of some atheists/agnostics, but many will develop their ideas from the content with preconceptions.When atheists try to create a character for themselves based on the things they read about Jesus in the Bible, they are already assuming preconceived ideas... They are often very wrong, and do not pay attention to those who do have an idea of the real person behind the stories because they have made the study of the Bible an essential matter for their own lives. Some imagine a political or revolutionary Jesus, others imagine just a very intelligent man who had a few followers, others imagine God walking among humans, etc.
But when I think of Institutional Indoctrination it is some Christians that spring to mind, actually. After all they are being filled with their beliefs from infancy.
I believe in:- Individual Investigation before Institutional Indoctrination (badger)
Have you? Carefully studied? For instance, do you know what Jesus and his disciples did after arriving in Jerusalem/Temple during that last (Palm) Sunday?The issue of who one believes Jesus to be was as topical at the time Jesus served as God's spokesman as it is now. He himself asked his disciples what opinion they had of him (Matt. 16:13-20; Mark 8:27-30; Luke 9:18-21). We now have various accounts of his life and work and can have a more complete notion... only if those accounts are carefully studied.
- Goat
- Site Supporter
- Posts: 24999
- Joined: Fri Jul 21, 2006 6:09 pm
- Has thanked: 25 times
- Been thanked: 207 times
Re: The Jesus to whom atheists and others often refer
Post #39So , we have a tale for which there is no source, and then the assumption that the tale given does not apply to Christians too . We have various accounts of Jesus, but nothing from him, and the accounts about him seem to be copied from each other.Eloi wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 3:49 pm I remember reading on the internet the following true story:
the daughter of a famous English writer had a modern English literature exam at her school, where no one knew that she was the daughter of the writer of the book from which an exam question was taken. She asked her father to explain the central idea in the book to help her answer the question. It turned out that when the daughter answered the exam, the teacher told her that she was wrong in her answer and gave her a totally different version about the central idea of the writer in his book ... without even suspecting that the wrong one was himself, for logical reasons.
When atheists try to create a character for themselves based on the things they read about Jesus in the Bible, they are already assuming preconceived ideas... They are often very wrong, and do not pay attention to those who do have an idea of the real person behind the stories because they have made the study of the Bible an essential matter for their own lives. Some imagine a political or revolutionary Jesus, others imagine just a very intelligent man who had a few followers, others imagine God walking among humans, etc.
The issue of who one believes Jesus to be was as topical at the time Jesus served as God's spokesman as it is now. He himself asked his disciples what opinion they had of him (Matt. 16:13-20; Mark 8:27-30; Luke 9:18-21). We now have various accounts of his life and work and can have a more complete notion... only if those accounts are carefully studied.
“What do you think science is? There is nothing magical about science. It is simply a systematic way for carefully and thoroughly observing nature and using consistent logic to evaluate results. So which part of that exactly do you disagree with? Do you disagree with being thorough? Using careful observation? Being systematic? Or using consistent logic?�
Steven Novella
Steven Novella
- brunumb
- Savant
- Posts: 6002
- Joined: Thu Nov 02, 2017 4:20 am
- Location: Melbourne
- Has thanked: 6627 times
- Been thanked: 3222 times
Re: The Jesus to whom atheists and others often refer
Post #40Yes, but is it really a true story?oldbadger wrote: ↑Fri May 27, 2022 5:32 pmI enjoyed that.Eloi wrote: ↑Thu May 26, 2022 3:49 pm I remember reading on the internet the following true story:
the daughter of a famous English writer had a modern English literature exam at her school, where no one knew that she was the daughter of the writer of the book from which an exam question was taken. She asked her father to explain the central idea in the book to help her answer the question. It turned out that when the daughter answered the exam, the teacher told her that she was wrong in her answer and gave her a totally different version about the central idea of the writer in his book ... without even suspecting that the wrong one was himself, for logical reasons.
George Orwell:: “The further a society drifts from the truth, the more it will hate those who speak it.”
Voltaire: "Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities."
Gender ideology is anti-science, anti truth.
Voltaire: "Those who can make you believe absurdities can make you commit atrocities."
Gender ideology is anti-science, anti truth.