What if Jesus wasn't a white dude?

[Vrbovan]

Thank you. The dates and specific references are what I've been waiting for.

the tricky part is not IF he existed. There is proof enough that he did.

the real question Historical Jesus Scholars face is what. What did he teach, think, believe?? there is much debate, but there a surprising amount that can be known.

using differing forms of critical historical analysis we can break down individual verses or "pericopea" from the Gospels and remove all the added theological additions. what we're left with is usually a true form of what Jesus said, did, or we can dismiss the verse as a later addition to the Jesus story and not authentic....


sorry if I'm going on about this... I'm just surprised people actually give a shit about my work!!! it usually makes my girlfriend puke :D

[Vrbovan]

Truth, in Revelation, they are given a second chance to accept Jesus as the one true Messiah.

don't read literally! Revelation is a metaphor NOT a prediction! Was Jesus the messiah? in Hebrew messiah meant anointed by God, so there could be many messiahs. King David was referred to as messiah.

[sticksdaman]

If there is one thing that this thread is proof of, it's that members of R3v are capable of carrying out logical well thought out debates. (when they are'nt talking about penises)

[Farbin Kaiber]

don't read literally! Revelation is a metaphor NOT a prediction! Was Jesus the messiah? in Hebrew messiah meant anointed by God, so there could be many messiahs. King David was referred to as messiah.

I'm not, I am speaking from the base translated materials, I know the horns mean other things, sets of seven stars, the Woman, etc. I was not claiming that it was literal, but it is stated that they will be given a second chance along with the others during a time a times, and half a time. (3.5 years durring the AntiChrist's time of power)

[ragged325]

I'm not, I am speaking from the base translated materials, I know the horns mean other things, sets of seven stars, the Woman, etc. I was not claiming that it was literal, but it is stated that they will be given a second chance along with the others during a time a times, and half a time. (3.5 years durring the AntiChrist's time of power)

I can't tell if you're kidding here.

And yes, I'm an asshole and you're all welcome to make fun of me when I'm burning in Hell.

[iwillhunt]

I can't tell if you're kidding here.

And yes, I'm an asshole and you're all welcome to make fun of me when I'm burning in Hell.

This, to me, comes across just as idiotic as when people say "God says it. I believe it. That settles it." Close mindedness FTL.

[Vrbovan]

I can't tell if you're kidding here.

And yes, I'm an asshole and you're all welcome to make fun of me when I'm burning in Hell.

Its good to question, because the answers will lead to the proper path.

as I said I am a Historical Jesus Scholar and a Christian, BUT I do not follow theology, rather I read to understand Jesus without all the magical BS that is clearly metaphorical.

Jesus was a Humanist and a revolutionary. its absolutely pointless to worry about anything else. see occam's razor

[Vrbovan]

NOW>>>>>>>> who the fuck can find me IS skirts for a 1990??

[Vrbovan]

I'm pretty sure that when all of the Christian theologians get together, it's pretty easy for them to agree that there is proof that Jesus was real.

you're missing the point. As I have said, Historical Jesus Scholars do NOT use theology in our work. In fact Theology is the enemy. what we do is try to understand the editorial interests of a Gospel writer, then remove the additions that would most likely serve that writers interests. What we have then is a purer form of the Gospel without all of the elaborations.

from that we reconstruct Jesus life. This is called the Historical Critical Method, this is Science not theology.

[ragged325]

you're missing the point. As I have said, Historical Jesus Scholars do NOT use theology in our work. In fact Theology is the enemy. what we do is try to understand the editorial interests of a Gospel writer, then remove the additions that would most likely serve that writers interests. What we have then is a purer form of the Gospel without all of the elaborations.

from that we reconstruct Jesus life. This is called the Historical Critical Method, this is Science not theology.

Thank you. That's very helpful.

[CleanAzzE30z]

I always imagined Jesus as a little orange Turtle with steel toed little turtle work boots. Instead of walking, though, he would hop to wherever he needed to go. And he only ate chicken alfredo thats all he would eat. No exceptions, always chicken alfredo. His favorite color was light blue. All he knew how to cook was hot dogs.


Mariano

[Vrbovan]

I always imagined Jesus as a little orange Turtle with steel toed little turtle work boots. Instead of walking, though, he would hop to wherever he needed to go. And he only ate chicken alfredo thats all he would eat. No exceptions, always chicken alfredo. His favorite color was light blue. All he knew how to cook was hot dogs.


Mariano

LOL typical response I get when talking about the historical critical methodologies....

[Massive Lee]

LOL typical response I get when talking about the historical critical methodologies....

So, Jesus did existed. He was Jewish and had an "enlightment". One day, he pretended he was God's son and his messiah. Everyone listened to him and books were written about him. Great. But not wanting to be "blaspheming", but what if he were simply schizophrenic, was hearing voices and pretended to be "our savior"? Just as tens of loonies, standing on wooden crates in NYC's Time Square, claiming the end of the world is near and that we should suffer for our sins... Was that worth basing another religion on a Jewish crack pot? Even his temporaries were in disbelief. Roman and Jews.

The Bible and Torah are full of metaphores: Virgin Mary, Moise splliting the sea in two, multiplication of breads, eating his flesh and drinking is blood, the talking/burning bush. That's a lot of nonsenses. And if his whole life as it is written was also just another metaphore serving some persons' purpose? Let's not forget that religion was (and still is) used as a tool of power for some manipulators to get rich and keep the power. Fat and rich monks in castles while poor peoples were starving. Religions were (are) a parallel government, and mythological texts can be interpretated to anyone's purpose.

So Jesus as a science stripped of any religious content? Not sure it works. And where there's religion, there's nonsense.

[ragged325]

[Vrbovan]

So, Jesus did existed. He was Jewish and had an "enlightment". One day, he pretended he was God's son and his messiah. Everyone listened to him and books were written about him. Great. But not wanting to be "blaspheming", but what if he were simply schizophrenic, was hearing voices and pretended to be "our savior"? Just as tens of loonies, standing on wooden crates in NYC's Time Square, claiming the end of the world is near and that we should suffer for our sins... Was that worth basing another religion on a Jewish crack pot? Even his temporaries were in disbelief. Roman and Jews.

The Bible and Torah are full of metaphores: Virgin Mary, Moise splliting the sea in two, multiplication of breads, eating his flesh and drinking is blood, the talking/burning bush. That's a lot of nonsenses. And if his whole life as it is written was also just another metaphore serving some persons' purpose? Let's not forget that religion was (and still is) used as a tool of power for some manipulators to get rich and keep the power. Fat and rich monks in castles while poor peoples were starving. Religions were (are) a parallel government, and mythological texts can be interpretated to anyone's purpose.

So Jesus as a science stripped of any religious content? Not sure it works. And where there's religion, there's nonsense.

There are many theses regarding who Jesus really was. what you've aluded to are two of the mainstreem thoughts.

first the end time preacher is known as Eschatology, from the Greek for the end time or Eschatos. this is essentially supported by authenticated Jesus sayings found in the Synoptic Gospels and the Gospel of Thomas. "The Kingdom is near, Repent"

the second you touched on was a potential voice in his head... this theory is seen rather more like Jesus as a sort of Jewish mystic. About the time of Jesus existed a type of Judaism that depended on deep meditation and prayer. very much like eastern religions such as Buddhism. this is a popular thesis. consider Jesus' 40 days trial in the desert... tempted by Satan. Theologically it makes sense... but realistically. read it again and you will see how it can be "stripped" of the authors influences and read to simply mean, He fasted, he prayed, he meditated, in his vision was tried by Satan (Know in Judaism as one who tests your will NOT as the king of hell) and did it for a prolonged period of time.

When you look at it from a historical critical point of veiw (the way we examine ALL historical texts) it makes sense and it works...