Respecting Jesus

[GADARENE]

"So if you think that I'm in any way "Putting Jesus Down" you are mistaken." myth believer

"I don't condemn Jesus at all" mb

"On the contrary, my view of Jesus is a highly respectable view." mb

What is it about Jesus that these myth believers respect?

christians, you may not have known this. myth believers don't put him (jesus) down or condemn him, either. as a matter of fact, they highly respect him and compare his teachings favorably with (perhaps even influenced by) Buddha

why? why do you think myth believers highly respect him, don't put him down or condemn him?

[bernee51]

"So if you think that I'm in any way "Putting Jesus Down" you are mistaken." myth believer

"I don't condemn Jesus at all" mb

"On the contrary, my view of Jesus is a highly respectable view." mb

What is it about Jesus that these myth believers respect?

christians, you may not have known this. myth believers don't put him (jesus) down or condemn him, either. as a matter of fact, they highly respect him and compare his teachings favorably with (perhaps even influenced by) Buddha

why? why do you think myth believers highly respect him, don't put him down or condemn him?

Hi there Mr T¥€£L

Because some of the things that have been attributed to him as his worldview are worthy of respect. His alleged words are true but partial.

[Divine Insight]

"So if you think that I'm in any way "Putting Jesus Down" you are mistaken." myth believer

"I don't condemn Jesus at all" mb

"On the contrary, my view of Jesus is a highly respectable view." mb

What is it about Jesus that these myth believers respect?

christians, you may not have known this. myth believers don't put him (jesus) down or condemn him, either. as a matter of fact, they highly respect him and compare his teachings favorably with (perhaps even influenced by) Buddha

why? why do you think myth believers highly respect him, don't put him down or condemn him?

For me the answer is simple. They simply aren't even talking about the same person.

For a Christian the New Testament = "The verbatim words of Jesus" (at least in the parts where it claims to be speaking for Jesus)

In fact, many Christians go far beyond this and attribute the entire teachings of Paul to Jesus, etc.

Christians also accept everything that is stated about Jesus in the New Testament. If the New Testament says that Jesus walked on water, then Jesus walked on water. Etc.

In other words, for them "Jesus" is precisely this character described in the New Testament verbatim. They even refer to the Gospels as "Jesus said this, and Jesus said that" (even in cases where the actual scriptures themselves aren't even claiming that Jesus had said the verses they are referencing)

So that's the "Christian View of Jesus".

A non-believer of the Bible who believes that Jesus may have actually been a real historical person at one point, but who doesn't believe all of the supernatural claims of the New Testament, doesn't accept every little verbatim detail. Neither in terms of what Jesus might have said, nor in terms of what Jesus might have actually done.

So the "Jesus" that they are imagining, is a totally different person from the character described in the New Testament.

Doesn't the New Testament actually have Jesus stating outright somewhere that he is "The Christ"?

If so, the non-believer is going to dismiss those kinds of claims as being nothing more than false superstitious rumors placed onto Jesus by these authors.

So the "Jesus" of a Non-believer, and the "Jesus" of Christianity are really quite different.

They are two different people. One is seen as the divine virgin-born son of God. The other is seen as a mortal man who was obviously quite terribly misunderstood and made into some sort of fictional demigod via the New Testament Rumors.

So these are simply two entirely different views of who Jesus might have been.

And therefore it's quite possible for a non-believer to imagine a "respectable" Jesus that wasn't a demigod at all, but instead was just some guy who was trying to teach higher morals values to his own culture and instead became a victim of Christian superstition and mythology.

I certainly fit into this group of non-believers who holds Jesus up as potentially having been a nice person who actually meant well.

But then again I was once a Christian who defended Jesus from hardliner Christians too. Believing that Jesus was the Son of God at that time.

So perhaps I'm kind of like an ex-smoker. Someone who used to smoke and has quite really hates to be around cigarettes.

The same thing may be true of ex-Christians. Even though they have quit Christianity they still hate to see Jesus made into a hateful demigod, so they try to make him into something more respectable.

It's probably a futile endeavor, but it's actually quite FUN.

Here's a book by a non-Christian that attempts to hold Jesus up in a respectable light.



I confess I haven't read this book myself, but I have seen videos where Deepak has explained the main concepts within. I should read it actually. I just don't want to buy it. I'll have to check to see if my local library has a copy. I could be a fun read.

[GADARENE]

"So if you think that I'm in any way "Putting Jesus Down" you are mistaken." myth believer

"I don't condemn Jesus at all" mb

"On the contrary, my view of Jesus is a highly respectable view." mb

What is it about Jesus that these myth believers respect?

christians, you may not have known this. myth believers don't put him (jesus) down or condemn him, either. as a matter of fact, they highly respect him and compare his teachings favorably with (perhaps even influenced by) Buddha

why? why do you think myth believers highly respect him, don't put him down or condemn him?

Hi there Mr T¥€£L

Because some of the things that have been attributed to him as his worldview are worthy of respect. His alleged words are true but partial.

"Because some of the things that have been attributed to him..." what things? by whom? can you be more specific?

thank you

[GADARENE]

"So if you think that I'm in any way "Putting Jesus Down" you are mistaken." myth believer

"I don't condemn Jesus at all" mb

"On the contrary, my view of Jesus is a highly respectable view." mb

What is it about Jesus that these myth believers respect?

christians, you may not have known this. myth believers don't put him (jesus) down or condemn him, either. as a matter of fact, they highly respect him and compare his teachings favorably with (perhaps even influenced by) Buddha

why? why do you think myth believers highly respect him, don't put him down or condemn him?

Hi there Mr T¥€£L

Because some of the things that have been attributed to him as his worldview are worthy of respect. His alleged words are true but partial.

maybe you could help me? "His alleged words are true but partial." which of his words are true? how can you tell? where did those words appear? iow, he lived and things he said were passed down to us

[GADARENE]

"The other is seen as a mortal man who was obviously quite terribly misunderstood and made into some sort of fictional demigod via the New Testament Rumors." mb

seen by whom as mortal? who sees the other one? where is the other one? what is the other one? what do you know about him and where is that data?

[GADARENE]

"A non-believer of the Bible who believes that Jesus may have actually been a real historical person at one point, but who doesn't believe all of the supernatural claims of the New Testament, doesn't accept every little verbatim detail. Neither in terms of what Jesus might have said, nor in terms of what Jesus might have actually done.

So the 'Jesus' that they are imagining, is a totally different person from the character described in the New Testament."

let me see if I get this. myth believers believe in an imaginary jesus. they imagine him based on him not being the imaginary Christ christians believe in. he is totally different.

the jesus they highly respect, don't put down or condemn and is like Buddha is a myth

[Divine Insight]

"The other is seen as a mortal man who was obviously quite terribly misunderstood and made into some sort of fictional demigod via the New Testament Rumors." mb

seen by whom as mortal? who sees the other one? where is the other one? what is the other one? what do you know about him and where is that data?

I look at it as follows Gadarene,

I've read the Old Testament and I've dismissed it as being totally absurd and having no more merit than Greek Mythology. So it's totally OUT of the picture as being worthy of anymore consideration as far as I'm concerned.

Ok, so now we see the New Testament stories of Jesus. I have TWO possible choices to make here. I can either dismiss them as being totally fabricated fiction having no possible reality at all. OR, I can ask what might have sparked these rumors?

I have my reasons for rejecting the idea that the New Testament stories are a total fabrication from scratch. Therefore it's reasonable for me to believe that there was some sort of actual person or event that triggered these outrageous superstitious rumors.

So I work from that perspective trying to figure out what kind of person might have been responsible for having trigger these rumors.

Here are some of my criteria.

1. The man had to have been a Jew.
2. The man argued and disagreed with the Jew Religious authorities.
3. The man didn't even agree with the teachings of the Old Testament.
4. The man clearly called the Jewish pharisees hypocrites and all manner of slander.
5. The man claimed to have been one with God.
6. When charged with Blaspheme for that claim he points to the Jewish doctrine where it says "Ye are Gods"
7. The man supposedly taught that whatever you do to your brother you do to him.
8. The man taught that heaven is at hand.
9. The man taught many things that are in completely agreement with Buddhism.
10. The man didn't appear to me to agree with much of anything that had been taught in the OT.

Where do I get all of these things? Directly from the gospels rumors.

And YES, I'm absolutely convinced that they necessarily have to be superstition rumors because recall above that I have already dismissed the OT as being clearly false. So the idea that Jesus was the Son of the God of Abraham isn't a idea that I'm even remotely prepared to take seriously at this point.

I had no clue what to make of any of this for many years. Nothing I could think of made any sense. But then I took a course on the History of Buddhism. In that course I learned of Mahayana Buddhism in great detail. That's when it struck me like a lightening bolt that if Jesus were a Mahayana Buddhist that would explain EVERYTHING.

And when I discovered that Mahayana Buddhism was actually quite successful and at its PEAK right at the same point in history when Jesus would have lived, that's when I concluded that this man named Jesus had to have been a Jew who had at least been highly influenced by Mahayana Buddhism if not directly tutored in it.

From there everything fell into place perfectly and everything made perfect sense of why Jesus would have done so many of the things that the Gospel rumors claim.

It explains why he didn't agree with the Jewish Pharisees.

It explains why he didn't agree with immoral teachings of the Old Testament.

It explains where he got his higher moral values from.

It explains why he proclaimed to be "One with God".

It explains when accused of blaspheme he points to the OT where it says, "Ye are Gods".

It explains why he would have disciples and teach them to carry on his teachings.

It explains why he spoke in parables and metaphors just like the Buddhist Monks do.

It just explains EVERYTHING.

And it doesn't require any supernatural rumors of virgin mother, or raising from the dead, or a God speaking from a cloud, or any of that.

This man was evidently horribly crucified at the hands of the Jewish Pharisees. Or at least at the hands of a mob incited by the Jewish Pharisees.

And that was a traumatic event that would have easily sparked all manner of extreme rumors to spring up about this man.

Also, it appears historically that there were many different early rumors about who Jesus might have been. It wasn't until the New Testament had actually been officially canonized and proclaimed to be the "Holy Scriptures" that other rumors about Jesus were quickly squelched. The commands from Roman authorities came down that anyone who blasphemes against the "Official Holy Scriptures" will be severely dealt with. And that would most certainly include anyone who continues to support any other rumors about this man named Jesus.

And that's how Christianity was born.

I believe this to be a fact.

And so the "Jesus" I consider is the man who most likely sparked these rumors.

NOT the superstitious character that the rumors themselves tried to make "Jesus" into.

There's no way I'm going to believe those rumors because in order for me to believe those rumors I would need to go back and resurrect the God of the Old Testament, and that is never going to happen.

I've ruled that out. In fact, the very idea that Jesus would be the sacrificial lamb of that God is utterly absurd anyway.

How can you have a God in the Old Testament dealing with sin one time by downing out the bulk of humanity, and then turning around and going a complete about face in the New Testament and sending his only begotten son to pay for the sins of men?

That's totally inconsistent with the original fabled God.

It's not even remotely a possibility, IMHO.

Jesus had to have been a mortal man. And he was most likely a Jew who was highly influenced by Mahayana Buddhism if not officially trained by a Buddhist monk. I have no clue which it may have been, but he most certainly was not the demigod Son of the God of Abraham of the OT. That's is not even remotely possible, IMHO.

[Divine Insight]

"A non-believer of the Bible who believes that Jesus may have actually been a real historical person at one point, but who doesn't believe all of the supernatural claims of the New Testament, doesn't accept every little verbatim detail. Neither in terms of what Jesus might have said, nor in terms of what Jesus might have actually done.

So the 'Jesus' that they are imagining, is a totally different person from the character described in the New Testament."

let me see if I get this. myth believers believe in an imaginary jesus. they imagine him based on him not being the imaginary Christ christians believe in. he is totally different.

the jesus they highly respect, don't put down or condemn and is like Buddha is a myth

I don't know whether Buddha existed as a real person either. For all I know the stories of the Buddha could be entirely fictional just to explain the philosophy. But that wouldn't change the value of the philosophy.

No one worships Buddha as a "God". Buddha was a mortal man just like you and me. He wasn't born of a virgin, he didn't raise from the dead, and no God spoke from any cloud proclaiming him to be special in any way.

Buddhism doesn't require the Buddha to be divine.

~~~~

By the way, when I suggest that Jesus was probably a Buddhist, that doesn't mean that I'm saying that Buddhism is somehow "right" or "true".

All I'm saying is that Jesus was most likely a Buddhist. Buddhism could be as false as it could possibly be, and Jesus could have still been a Buddhist, or highly influenced by that philosophy.

Proclaiming that Jesus was a Buddhist, is in no way suggesting that Buddhism is therefore "true".

Buddhism was a spiritual philosophy that apparently had a very deep impact on this man named Jesus.

That's all I'm saying.

For all I know secular atheism could be the truth of reality.

But I confess that I personally believe the truth of reality is spiritual. Not necessarily as seen by Buddhism either.

In fact, I personally prefer Taoism as an actual explanation of reality.

But I confess to being agnostic (i.e. without definitive knowledge on this particular question of reality).

It could be atheism, it could be mystical. I don't know.

I prefer to believe that reality is mystical, and I also intuitively lean in that direction. It's my "gut feeling" that reality is mystical.

But as the atheists point out, that doesn't make it so.

[The Tongue]

"A non-believer of the Bible who believes that Jesus may have actually been a real historical person at one point, but who doesn't believe all of the supernatural claims of the New Testament, doesn't accept every little verbatim detail. Neither in terms of what Jesus might have said, nor in terms of what Jesus might have actually done.

So the 'Jesus' that they are imagining, is a totally different person from the character described in the New Testament."

let me see if I get this. myth believers believe in an imaginary jesus. they imagine him based on him not being the imaginary Christ christians believe in. he is totally different.

the jesus they highly respect, don't put down or condemn and is like Buddha is a myth

Buddha the great reformer of Hinduism lived and taught in the eastern part of the Indian subcontinent some time between the 6th and 4th centuries BCE.

Jesus and Buddha are both said to have been born of a pure virgin, honoured by heavenly beings at their birth, prayed to by Kings, and loaded with presents, ’ happy is the whole world sing the gods, under the form of young Brahmins at the birth of the child Buddha. And it is said over and over again in the Chinese books that Buddha was incarnate of the Holy Spirit, and born of a ‘pure virgin’. It is written also in the Lalita Vistara, ‘ the legendary biography of Buddha,’ dating from before the time of Christ, “For he is indeed born who brings salvation, and will establish the world in blessedness. He is born who will darken sun and moon by the splendor of his merits and will put all darkness to flight. The blind see, the deaf hear, the demented are restored to reason.� A. Drews, ‘The Christ Myth, P. 104.

BTW: I believe that both Jesus and Buddha, were historical men who were born of the seed of Adam by the sexual union of male and female human parents.