Wednesday, September 03, 2014

What If...


Back in 2008, BRT posted a "review" :) of Religious, Bill Maer's  hilarious take on religion, a flick that has NEVER aired on mainline TV. As per BRT, an inquiry into the Jesus myth was undertaken with brief excursions into the Nicene Creed, the myth of Horus and the fact that all depiction's of JC center on the four New Testament gospels written 80 - 100 years after his death., so... did Christ exist akin to that of the once very popular Horus, who predated Christ by 2500 years, as the Hours story has all the particulars depicting the essence of Christ including:



Now comes more data, based on valid research, that may show that JC was an artificial construct, created by talented men who wanted to validate their religion to the great unwashed back in the day.


But there are problems with this narrative due to...
  1. No first century secular evidence whatsoever exists to support the actuality of Yeshua ben Yosef.  In the words of [10] Bart Ehrman: “What sorts of things do pagan authors from the time of Jesus have to say about him? Nothing.
  2. The earliest New Testament writers seem ignorant of the details of Jesus’ life, which become more crystalized in later texts.Paul seems unaware of any virgin birth, for example. No wise men, no star in the east, no miracles. Historians have long puzzled over the “Silence of Paul” on the most basic biographical facts and teachings of Jesus.
  3. Even the New Testament stories don’t claim to be first-hand accounts. We now know that the four gospels were assigned the names of the apostles Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, not written by them. 
  4. The gospels, our only accounts of a historical Jesus, contradict each other.If you think you know the Jesus story pretty well, I suggest that you pause at this point to test yourself with the 20 question quiz [14] at ExChristian.net.
  5. Modern scholars who claim to have uncovered the real historical Jesus depict wildly different persons.  They include a cynic philosopher, charismatic Hasid, liberal Pharisee, conservative rabbi, Zealot revolutionary, nonviolent pacifist to borrow from a much longer list assembled by Price [16]. In his words (pp. 15-16), “The historical Jesus (if there was one) might well have been a messianic king, or a progressive Pharisee, or a Galilean shaman, or a magus, or a Hellenistic sage.  But he cannot very well have been all of them at the same time.”  John Dominic Crossan [17] of the Jesus Seminar grumbles that “the stunning diversity is an academic embarrassment.” 
It's worth considering, don't you think?

Post a Comment