By Andrew Drews.
By the 19th century, if not earlier, critical scholarship on Jesus of theology had returned a verdict of non existence. Theologians and their followers, however, still maintain a belief in a historical Jesus.
How is it that religion is so resistant to evidence? How come little of the critical scholarship seem to permeate the publics and majority of believers take it on the word of their shepherds that the Jesus of theology is a historical personage.
There has been argument by others, religious and secular, that the Christ of theology is based on a historical personage. This admission however annihilate any possibility of the historicity of the Jesus of theology. He just doesn’t exist.
And so the verdict must stand that the Jesus of theology never walked this good earth.
And protestants, as SoM used to say, are truly lost. I don’t believe that I finally agree with that fellow.
By sticking to tradition, a tradition it invented for her interests, the Catholic church, both Greek and Roman, has most faithfully preserved the spirit of early Christendom. It is no wonder, then, that it refers to tradition for the truth of its religious view of the world.
In Christ Myth, the author notes that Protestantism is completely unhistoric in passing off the gospels as the sources, as the revealed basis of the faith in Christ, as if they had arisen independently of the church.
To be Christian therefore, one must unite as a member with the church- body of Christ.
The verdict seems to be an emphatic no. Paul it seems cannot even tell us about whether he was historical.
I am talking of Krishna. The Gita runs thus
I am the act of sacrifice, the sacrifice of God and man. I am the sap of the plant, the words, the sacrificial butter and fire, and at the same time the victim.
I was looking for an introduction to this post and I think Jesus in wonderland by Ark does it for me.
In his book, Christ Myth( which yours truly is currently reading) Arthur Drews concludes and I quote
Whether there was a place called Nazareth in pre-Christian days must be considered as at least very doubtful. Such a place is not mentioned either in the old testament or in the Talmud, which, however, mentions more than 60 Galilean towns; nor again, by the Jewish historian Josephus, nor in the Apocrypha. Cheyne believes himself justified by this in the conclusion that Nazareth in the new testament is a pure geographical fiction.
The ‘nazorean’ is applied to Jesus only as guardian of the world, protector and deliverer of men from the power of sin and demons, but without any reference to a quite obscure and entirely unknown village named Nazareth, which is mentioned in documents beyond any dispute, only from the fourth century.
brainwash oneself? The level of profit Owuor’s delusion pales in comparison to the delusion CS or Mel suffers. The profit told a crusade of
“I’ve taken personal authority. Strictly based on the words of my tongue. I bless you with eternity. You will see the glory kingdom of God. The heavens have heard,”
whereas my Muslim friends think Mohammed is the last profit of god, profit Owuor has said
everyone is created knowing that the Lord is God and that he (Owour) is His prophet. That if you abuse him you go direct to the hell; to a special graveyard.
I don’t know how people are still Catholics.
Here, the pope has acknowledged some bishops and priests had made nuns sexual slaves.
And somewhere in Texas, 286 priests have been named as having abused children.
Maybe it is time the Catholic church closed its doors.