My Model Of Jesus

[Jagella]

Recently my good friend and colleague RightReason inspired me with the following piece of advice:

If I am angry it is because many like you put forth bogus speculations without evidence/support. Open mindedness does not mean forgoing reason, facts, evidence, and just making stuff up. When you have Biblical or historical support of your alternative facts, then maybe we can talk.

He's right! Reason, facts, and evidence are crucial in any assessment of the historical Jesus. But seeing that reason, facts, and evidence for Jesus are in short supply, I've decided to just go with the gospel tale and what I know about human nature to come up with my own view of the "real" Jesus.

Since this is the OP, I will be concise. If Jesus existed, then I think he was a young Jewish rebel who hated those Jews who disagreed with him and who feared the Romans. He was mentally ill and may have suffered from schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder, manic depression, delusional disorder, delusions of grandeur, auditory-visual hallucinations, paranoia, Geschwind syndrome and abnormal experiences associated with temporal lobe epilepsy (TLE). Any combination of these mental disorders explains his imaginary Father Of The Sky (FOTS) and his special place in FOTS' scheme of things. His paranoia became self-fulfilling when he engineered his own death on the cross by acting in such a way as to have the Romans arrest him for sedition.

Question for Debate: Can anybody here demonstrate that my model of Jesus is wrong?

[Jagella]

Not I.
I can't even demonstrate that your model of Jesus is right.

And that's the problem with what we think we know about Jesus. Anybody can say anything they want about him, and in most cases nobody can demonstrate that they're wrong.

Not true at all.

How is what I said not true? I just posted my model of Jesus, and nobody has demonstrated it to be wrong.

And it should be pointed out, you have not touched upon a problem with explaining Jesus, but a problem with all historical research.

If there's a problem with all historical research, then there's a problem with explaining Jesus. But actually the "historical research" regarding Jesus is even worse because it has been dominated by Christianity making it more of an apologetic than objective history studies.

Historical research (i.e., assessing past data--writings, archaeology, etc.) has in general narrowed down the criteria to a few principles, of which are most prominent:

Explanatory Scope
Explanatory Power
Plausibility
Absence of ad hoc maneuvers.

Your hypothesis on this thread fails in all categories.

How so? My model of Jesus effectively explains the subject matter it pertains to, it explains essentially all the evidence, it is entirely plausible, and it is very adaptable.

But your list of criterion is way too vague to come up with any specific historical probabilities. See Post 10 in which I use Bayes' Theorem to apply it to one of the conclusions of my model.

[dio9]

Recently my good friend and colleague RightReason inspired me with the following piece of advice:

If I am angry it is because many like you put forth bogus speculations without evidence/support. Open mindedness does not mean forgoing reason, facts, evidence, and just making stuff up. When you have Biblical or historical support of your alternative facts, then maybe we can talk.

He's right! Reason, facts, and evidence are crucial in any assessment of the historical Jesus. But seeing that reason, facts, and evidence for Jesus are in short supply, I've decided to just go with the gospel tale and what I know about human nature to come up with my own view of the "real" Jesus.

Since this is the OP, I will be concise. If Jesus existed, then I think he was a young Jewish rebel who hated those Jews who disagreed with him and who feared the Romans. He was mentally ill and may have suffered from schizophrenia, schizoaffective disorder, manic depression, delusional disorder, delusions of grandeur, auditory-visual hallucinations, paranoia, Geschwind syndrome and abnormal experiences associated with temporal lobe epilepsy (TLE). Any combination of these mental disorders explains his imaginary Father Of The Sky (FOTS) and his special place in FOTS' scheme of things. His paranoia became self-fulfilling when he engineered his own death on the cross by acting in such a way as to have the Romans arrest him for sedition.

Question for Debate: Can anybody here demonstrate that my model of Jesus is wrong?

Psychologists won't even psych analyse Trump without interviewing him. With all the information we have on him. How can you diagnose Jesus from the little we have from the Gospels? The op is a total troll. There is no well founded way you can diagnose Jesus. Show me scripture references that support what you wrote. That would be worthy of discussion and maybe we could learn something.

[Tcg]

And that's the problem with what we think we know about Jesus. Anybody can say anything they want about him, and in most cases nobody can demonstrate that they're wrong.

This is true of many claims. The proper question, however, given that you are making a claim, is can you demonstrate you're right.

Is it safe to say that your answer to the question for debate is no, you cannot demonstrate that my model of Jesus is wrong?

Of course it is. That reality however doesn't demonstrate that it is right. That is your job. You've yet to do so.


I could claim that Jesus ate plants that contained DMT and that his whole story was based on the trips that resulted. You couldn't demonstrate that this "model of Jesus" is wrong. That wouldn't make it correct.


You haven't put the cart before the horse, you've got no horse to propel the cart.



Tcg

[Jagella]

Psychologists won't even psych analyse Trump without interviewing him. With all the information we have on him.

Psychologists have analyzed Trump without an "interview." See Does Trump Suffer from Narcissistic Personality Disorder? Check your facts before you post.

How can you diagnose Jesus from the little we have from the Gospels?

I found the information I posted in the OP regarding Jesus' mental state in the Wikipedia article, Psychology of religion. Scroll down to the section, Religion and mental illness. The source cited is Murray, Evan D.; Cunningham, Miles G.; Price, Bruce H. (September 2011). "The Role of Psychotic Disorders in Religious History Considered". Journal of Neuropsychiatry and Clinical Neurosciences.

Show me scripture references that support what you wrote.

You may wish to read the article I cited. Personally, I think Jesus imagined his "Father of the Sky" (FOTS) and may have believed that he was actually hearing this imaginary man in the sky. See Matthew 5:48, Matthew 6:14, Matthew 6:26, and Luke 11:13.

[Jagella]

Of course it is. That reality however doesn't demonstrate that it is right. That is your job. You've yet to do so.

I'm not sure why you've come to that conclusion. Did you carefully read what I've posted on this thread especially posts 10 and 14? If I went over your head with Bayes' Theorem in Post 10, then let me know, and I'll try to clarify.

[Tcg]

Of course it is. That reality however doesn't demonstrate that it is right. That is your job. You've yet to do so.

I'm not sure why you've come to that conclusion. Did you carefully read what I've posted on this thread especially posts 10 and 14? If I went over your head with Bayes' Theorem in Post 10, then let me know, and I'll try to clarify.

Is this an admission that you do have the responsibility to support your claims concerning your "Model of Jesus?"


If so you need to support this absolute claim from your OP:

• "He was mentally ill"

Backpedaling on this original claim, as you've done in both post 10 and 14, doesn't support your absolute claim from the OP.


We have made progress in that you've admitted you need to support this claim. Now all you have to do is support it with evidence fitting to make an absolute conclusion as you did from the start. If you can't provide this evidence, the only conclusion is that your OP overstepped the available evidence.



Tcg

[Jagella]

[Replying to post 16 by Tcg]

What do you mean by "backpedaling"? If you're trolling, then please stop.

[Tcg]

[Replying to post 16 by Tcg]

What do you mean by "backpedaling"?

Your OP made this absolute claim:

• "He was mentally ill"

By the tenth post you backpedaled from that claim to this:

• "I calculate that there is a fifty percent chance that Jesus was mentally ill."

Tcg

[bjs]

[Replying to post 1 by Jagella]

The first obvious problem is that your write, “Reason, facts, and evidence are crucial in any assessment of the historical Jesus,� but then you use none of those things. You just make stuff up.

As for demonstrating that your model of Jesus is wrong: The documents say what they say. You don’t have to believe the written accounts, but that does not somehow validate your fantasies.

[Jagella]

Question for Debate: Can anybody here demonstrate that my model of Jesus is wrong?

Obviously, no, my model of Jesus cannot be proved wrong, and that's the problem with all models of Jesus including the "Christian model." The figure of Jesus is ghostly and amorphous and can be shaped any way any person wishes. Those who disagree with that model can huff and puff, but they cannot blow it down. That's why we have so many contradictory, competing models of Jesus. So when anybody says they believe in Jesus, ask them, "Which one?"