The Jesus to whom atheists and others often refer

Argue for and against Christianity

Moderator: Moderators

Post Reply
Eloi
Banned
Banned
Posts: 1775
Joined: Wed Aug 07, 2019 9:31 pm
Has thanked: 43 times
Been thanked: 213 times
Contact:

The Jesus to whom atheists and others often refer

Post #1

Post by Eloi »

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?

User avatar
brunumb
Savant
Posts: 5993
Joined: Thu Nov 02, 2017 4:20 am
Location: Melbourne
Has thanked: 6607 times
Been thanked: 3209 times

Re: The Jesus to whom atheists and others often refer

Post #11

Post by brunumb »

Eloi wrote: Sun May 15, 2022 12:57 pm 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.
Are we to assume from this introduction that you actually have the correct interpretation and that any different interpretations are therefore wrong? Just checking.
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.

User avatar
brunumb
Savant
Posts: 5993
Joined: Thu Nov 02, 2017 4:20 am
Location: Melbourne
Has thanked: 6607 times
Been thanked: 3209 times

Re: The Jesus to whom atheists and others often refer

Post #12

Post by brunumb »

Eloi wrote: Sun May 15, 2022 3:05 pm However, capable scientists are becoming increasingly cautious about saying that a certain thing is impossible. Professor John R. Brobeck of the University of Pennsylvania stated: “A scientist is no longer able to say honestly something is impossible. He can only say it is improbable. But he may be able to say something is impossible to explain in terms of our present knowledge. Science cannot say that all properties of matter and all forms of energy are now known. . . . [For a miracle] one thing that needs to be added is a source of energy unknown to us in our biological and physiological sciences. In our Scriptures this source of energy is identified as the power of God.” (Time, July 4, 1955) Since this statement was made, further scientific development has made it more emphatic.
The real issue about alleged miracles is not about them being impossible but that events claimed to have been miraculous have not been irrefutably demonstrated as such. Any event which is improbable, no matter how small the probability, may still occur naturally if the probability is not zero. In that case no supernatural intervention, or miracle, is necessary.
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.

User avatar
oldbadger
Guru
Posts: 1805
Joined: Sun Dec 30, 2012 11:11 am
Has thanked: 310 times
Been thanked: 220 times

Re: The Jesus to whom atheists and others often refer

Post #13

Post by oldbadger »

Eloi wrote: Sun May 15, 2022 12:57 pm 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.
Is unreasonable wealth amongst unreasonable poverty 'honest possession?'
Lots of Christians seem to try to defend massive wealth....yes?
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?
Which scripture? Jesus the man with a mission as in G-Mark, or Jesus the God ion G-John?
I know which one I trust most.
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.
That would be nice....and what are your conclusions?
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?
Jesus and the Baptist, both men, as described in G-Mark.
We can see that Jesus loved his friends, his meat and his wine. And he loved justice for all.

Athetotheist
Prodigy
Posts: 2690
Joined: Sat Nov 02, 2019 5:24 pm
Has thanked: 14 times
Been thanked: 484 times

Re: The Jesus to whom atheists and others often refer

Post #14

Post by Athetotheist »

[Replying to Eloi in post #1
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
At the end of such a discussion, I recently left a question which has since gone unanswered.
What is the Jesus you have in mind? Does it correspond to the Jesus of the Bible?
I take what Jesus allegedly said from what the Christian Bible says he said, so I would say that the Jesus I have in mind corresponds to the Jesus of the Bible.

User avatar
Difflugia
Prodigy
Posts: 3017
Joined: Wed Jun 12, 2019 10:25 am
Location: Michigan
Has thanked: 3247 times
Been thanked: 1997 times

Re: The Jesus to whom atheists and others often refer

Post #15

Post by Difflugia »

Eloi wrote: Sun May 15, 2022 12:57 pmCan 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?
There are at least seven different Jesuses of Scripture (Matthew, Mark, Luke/Acts, John, Paul, Hebrews, Revelation). Attempts at harmonizing these different Jesuses and the search for a historical Jesus create an eighth and ninth.
Eloi wrote: Sun May 15, 2022 12:57 pmThis 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.
Exactly. That's why phrases like, "Jesus said," or "Jesus did," cause confusion on their own. When I'm discussing one of the Jesuses, I try to be specific about which one I'm talking about.
Eloi wrote: Sun May 15, 2022 12:57 pmWhat is the Jesus you have in mind? Does it correspond to the Jesus of the Bible?
It depends on the context. If one is careful, each of the first seven corresponds to a Jesus in the Bible. Even there, though, it's easy to get confused, especially if one is used to thinking of the eighth or ninth as the "real" Jesus.
Eloi wrote: Sun May 15, 2022 12:57 pmCan you really know what Jesus was like?
Probably not.
Eloi wrote: Sun May 15, 2022 12:57 pmMany 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.
At least some of them did. Though the details differ slightly in each case, each of the four Gospel Jesuses disobeyed the Sabbath law.
Eloi wrote: Sun May 15, 2022 12:57 pmBut that is an incorrect way of understanding Jesus
It is if talking about Jesuses five through seven and possibly eight. See how confusing it can be if one isn't serious about terms and premises?
Eloi wrote: Sun May 15, 2022 12:57 pmjust like a political Jesus is
The Synoptic Jesuses (Jesuses one, two, and three) shared a political opinion about whether people should pay taxes. You must be thinking of one of the other Jesuses.
Eloi wrote: Sun May 15, 2022 12:57 pmor one who does not admit rich people among his followers, as if honest possessions were sin.
Again, all three Synoptic Jesuses vilified the rich. John's Jesus didn't mention wealth, so maybe that's the one you're thinking of.
My pronouns are he, him, and his.

User avatar
oldbadger
Guru
Posts: 1805
Joined: Sun Dec 30, 2012 11:11 am
Has thanked: 310 times
Been thanked: 220 times

Re: The Jesus to whom atheists and others often refer

Post #16

Post by oldbadger »

Difflugia wrote: Mon May 16, 2022 9:53 pm
At least some of them did. Though the details differ slightly in each case, each of the four Gospel Jesuses disobeyed the Sabbath law.
Not really..... Grazing as one travels can't bust a Mosaic law any more than drinking from a stream, and those healings, why, he didn't even place a bandage. :)

The Priests who accused him bust the Sabbath Laws of Exodus as soon as they stepped out from their homes but nobody bothers with that.
Ex. 16:29 } See, for that the LORD hath given you the sabbath, therefore he giveth you on the sixth day the bread of two days; abide ye every man in his place, let no man go out of his place on the seventh day.

Jesus stood for a return of the old laws, especially the poor laws of the OT. Every word and action..... But God, or only Son of God... meh.

User avatar
Difflugia
Prodigy
Posts: 3017
Joined: Wed Jun 12, 2019 10:25 am
Location: Michigan
Has thanked: 3247 times
Been thanked: 1997 times

Re: The Jesus to whom atheists and others often refer

Post #17

Post by Difflugia »

oldbadger wrote: Tue May 17, 2022 2:29 amNot really..... Grazing as one travels can't bust a Mosaic law any more than drinking from a stream,
Or picking up sticks? Moses was pretty strict about the "do no work" thing.
oldbadger wrote: Tue May 17, 2022 2:29 amand those healings, why, he didn't even place a bandage. :)
Which must mean that it wasn't work?
oldbadger wrote: Tue May 17, 2022 2:29 amThe Priests who accused him bust the Sabbath Laws of Exodus as soon as they stepped out from their homes but nobody bothers with that.

Ex. 16:29 } See, for that the LORD hath given you the sabbath, therefore he giveth you on the sixth day the bread of two days; abide ye every man in his place, let no man go out of his place on the seventh day.
So, is God convinced by a tu quoque fallacy, too?
oldbadger wrote: Tue May 17, 2022 2:29 amJesus stood for a return of the old laws, especially the poor laws of the OT. Every word and action.....
Some of the words and actions attributed to him by some of the authors, anyway.
My pronouns are he, him, and his.

TRANSPONDER
Savant
Posts: 7960
Joined: Thu Apr 29, 2021 8:05 am
Has thanked: 932 times
Been thanked: 3486 times

Re: The Jesus to whom atheists and others often refer

Post #18

Post by TRANSPONDER »

Aside from Eloi arguing for miracles, the topic is on the nature and teachings of Jesus and how atheists see him.

There is a lot of discussion, but one that seems to seriously mislead atheist apologists (skeptical Bible -critics) is the passage about the (Mosaic) Law not passing away leading to an argument that Jesus was not anti Judaism. I'm sure that this is to misunderstand the Gospels, which are written by Greek Christians who couldn't read Hebrew and did not really understand the OT passages they adapted as Prophecy.

To me, it is obvious that the proto -Christian Jesus is anti the Law, anti the teachers of the Law and anti Jews in general. Sure, the Law was given by God so can't just be tossed in the Bin. But it can be 'Fulfilled' by following the Spirit and thus the old rules can be dropped. No observing eye for eye, no ritual cleanliness, no Kosher laws, no Sabbath observance, even honoring father and mother is less than the Brethren and Sistren of the cult. And I hardly need point out the deadly self - cursing of Judaism in Matthew (alone) 27.25. Though his intention was like the other gospel - writers, to shift the blame for the death of Jesus from Rome (who actually did it) to the Jews (who didn't).

That 'Law shall not pass away' passage has misled atheist apologists too often. It's necessary to compare it with Luke 16.17 which doesn't say the same as Matthew and the line is that when the Baptist appeared (heralding Jesus) the law and prophets were superseded. Christians know and use this 'New Covenant' excuse to sideline the law at need.

Atheists and Bible critics need to cease being misled into reading into Law shall not pass away' passage some 'Real Jesus' preaching a reformed Judaism corrupted by its' greedy and venial leaders, but a Christianised Jesus spouting Paulinist arguments to set aside Judaism and follow Jesus. And that's what Both Matthew and Luke on the Law shall not pass away' are really saying.

Not Mark, or course, as this is "Q" material. (1)

8-) (1) "Q" is a Pet theory of mine. At one time, quite a fad, it fell out of favour and now seems to be regarded as a nut cult or conspiracy theory. There even seems to be confusion about what it means.

"Q" (Quelle or original document). Seems originally to have denoted the text shared by Matthew and Luke but not by Mark and which was written into the original gospel used by Mark, Matthew and Luke. That's how I use the term and I think the evidence is that a lost document accounts for the common Matthew/Luke material.
Others use "Q" to denote the lost synoptic original (I prefer Proto Matthew as it may explain the original 'Matthew' that Jerome or Origen claimed to have seen in Caesarea). I don't use the term in that way.

I do however use the term 'M' to refer to a (supposed) lost gospel that Mark and Matthew used and Luke didn't. it seemed complicated even to me O:) , but it explains the problems without having to pretend they don't exist.

Eloi
Banned
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 #19

Post by Eloi »

Certainly there are many ideas about who Jesus was as a human and what his personality, his works and his teachings were. Obviously those different ways of describing him based on personal interpretations, if they contradict each other, can not be true at the same time.

First of all, although we have several gospels that talk about Jesus (and other passages outside of the gospels), the inspired Christian writers were living at the time of Jesus and many of them knew him in person and followed him from the beginning. Although their narratives may be focused on different aspects of the life and teachings of Jesus, it is reasonable and logical to think that we can find the real individual behind those different narratives, since they all converge on the same actual person they are describing. That individual behind the narratives is the one that every Christian should really know.

About an alleged Jesus who violated the Sabbath law... what do you base on to accuse Jesus of having done that?

TRANSPONDER
Savant
Posts: 7960
Joined: Thu Apr 29, 2021 8:05 am
Has thanked: 932 times
Been thanked: 3486 times

Re: The Jesus to whom atheists and others often refer

Post #20

Post by TRANSPONDER »

Eloi wrote: Tue May 17, 2022 12:16 pm Certainly there are many ideas about who Jesus was as a human and what his personality, his works and his teachings were. Obviously those different ways of describing him based on personal interpretations, if they contradict each other, can not be true at the same time.

First of all, although we have several gospels that talk about Jesus (and other passages outside of the gospels), the inspired Christian writers were living at the time of Jesus and many of them knew him in person and followed him from the beginning. Although their narratives may be focused on different aspects of the life and teachings of Jesus, it is reasonable and logical to think that we can find the real individual behind those different narratives, since they all converge on the same actual person they are describing. That individual behind the narratives is the one that every Christian should really know.

About an alleged Jesus who violated the Sabbath law... what do you base on to accuse Jesus of having done that?

Of course I'm out on a limb rather as Mainstream skeptics, even, assume the gospel accounts to be reliable report. My argument is from the text itself to show that it can't be. Matthew alone in the misreading of the Virgin birth massacre at Bethlehem prophecy (1), and two donkeys show he can't understand the OT and cannot be an eyewitness or he'd know it is one donkey - and may be the only actual true prophecy. But I make these claims and so far never have to explain why.

However, you ask about the Sabbath law. I'm surprised that you ask. Healing on the Sabbath is a big feature of Jesus superseding the Jewish laws on the grounds that doing good justifies breaking the Sabbath. Now this is a valid point even in Jewish law and there ought to be some discussion about it. But there never is. Jesus stumps and silences the teachers of the Law and the slink away to plot dirty deeds.

The same agenda in Gospel writing that Luke does in Acts where Paul, fleeing the impending Nabatean attack on Damascus (36/7 AD based on numismatics) which he ludicrously excuses by claiming they were after him, is turned into Paul fleeing a Jewish plot to kill him..

I may reiterate here the argument of David and the Shewbread Mark 2.25, Matthew 12.3 Luke 6.3, which is a terrible argument but the Pharisees say nothing. This is not only Christian anti - Judaism but can never be an argument that Jesus could have made, never mind being called on it by the Pharisees. This was written by Christians, for Christians, to convince them that Jesus showed that Jewish law had been replaced by something better.

(1) and that puzzling 'Nazarene' prophecy that has apparently gone missing. There never was one but Matthew turns his Nativity 'And that's why Jesus became a Nazorene' into a 'prophecy' that doesn't exist. I may also say this is all Mathew's (poor) work and none of the other synoptics have this.

Post Reply