Leave these fields empty (spam trap):
Name
You can leave this blank to post anonymously, or you can create a Tripcode by using the float Name#Password
Comment
[*]Italic Text[/*]
[**]Bold Text[/**]
[~]Taimapedia Article[/~]
[%]Spoiler Text[/%]
>Highlight/Quote Text
[pre]Preformatted & Monospace text[/pre]
1. Numbered lists become ordered lists
* Bulleted lists become unordered lists
File

Sandwich


WEED IS LEGAL IN CANADA! Live 420chan Q&A and Site Merchandise Giveaways on Stream

Live 420chan Q&A, 420chan merchandise giveaways, Logitech hardware giveaways, partying on Twitch tonight!
G502 Giveaway Ends @ Midnight     Q&A Discussion Thread
Was Jesus an Iron Age cult leader? by Doris Fuckingson - Thu, 13 Jul 2017 16:42:44 EST ID:6FQAmMFX No.57218 Ignore Report Quick Reply
File: 1499978564344.jpg -(239294B / 233.69KB, 1280x720) Thumbnail displayed, click image for full size. 239294
Hi all (Before I start quick disclosure: I am an atheist but I am here to have an honest discussion and am not here to troll and offend anyone.)

When i read the account of Christ and I read it as a myth that was meant to be examined as testimony I imagine that instead of reading a book Luke, John, or Matthew are at the bar just telling me a story about some guy they knew. This is what a testimony is after all: a story someone tells you. If a book is written in the format of a testimony thus you must not necessarily believe the narrator at all times. Sometimes you can assume that he is lying or exaggerating things just like a stranger telling you a story at a bar would. (Sorry for the long intro but it will help the rest of this make sense... hopefully) So following this logic and using its lens to examine the bible I make 3 assumptions as I read the accounts of Christs life.

1 - Jesus is not divine and has no special powers. (ex. I've never seen a dude walk on water why would I believe a testimony that says someone saw someone do it somewhere.)

2 - No one else has special powers everyone is a human limited by the knowledge and culture of Iron Age Middle East.

3 - Jesus is corruptible just like every other person.

Now with all this in play as I go through the bible I hear a story about a Iron age Rabbi that ran an organization with lots of hall marks of a cult like abandoning families to follow a holy teacher, giving up wealth, and dedicating one entire life soul, body, and mind to the holy teacher. Further this holy teacher showed them a bunch of cheap parlor tricks. The holy teacher was so narcissistic and egocentric that anytime anything other then him comes up he tells you how unimportant it is compared to him and tells you to give up everything just to worship him and serve him.

Further he is reckless and his delusions of grandeur like thinking he is himself a god as well as his corrupt nature like soaking himself in a years wages worth of perfume in one sitting in front of a bunch of people who gave everything up to obey and follow him. The picture is clear. I do not see a wise and loving guy. I see Charles Manson or Marshall Applewhite.

Again, I am not here trying to offend anyone, I am just trying to honestly explain my thought process. Now that I explained my thoughts, what I really want to ask is what are yours? How do you read the bible? How do you see Jesus? What do you think were his motivations and aspirations? And most importantly why do you believe these things.

My analysis lead me to make this documentary about the life of Christ where I go into detail and develop my thesis from birth to crucifixion. If you care for such a thing here is a link.
https://www.youtube.com...
(I will warn because it is based on the biblical account of the life of Jesus there is explicit content that is violent and sexual in nature in some parts of his life's account.)
>>
Hamilton Clenningwut - Fri, 14 Jul 2017 07:28:24 EST ID:n86/MK/a No.57219 Ignore Report Quick Reply
There are four possible scenarios.
1) Jesus was just a really cool autistic philosophical guy who just never realised how offensive and far-out the shit he said was
2) Jesus was an egocentric narcissistic cult leader who wanted people to see him as a god
3) Jesus did a fucking shitton of drugs and was pretty much tripping balls all the time
4) Jesus was completely fucking crazy thinking the voices he heard were from God and the Devil
>>
Martin Piffingcocke - Fri, 14 Jul 2017 11:17:23 EST ID:IJ+XRmlD No.57220 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>was jesus ... iron age?

no
>>
Albert Billinghall - Sat, 15 Jul 2017 05:40:10 EST ID:sVSDp2E0 No.57221 Ignore Report Quick Reply
You're looking at all the wrong stuff. None of the gospel accounts were written by the people who were there. The strongest piece of information we have for the historical Jesus is that he was put to death by the state because of his messianic activities. That could include preaching that he's the son of God, preaching militant revolution, or deflowering the wrong person's daughter. I think someone's interpretation says far more about them than it does about any set of historical facts.

>>57220
Wut?
>>
Isabella Clondlefield - Sat, 15 Jul 2017 10:20:22 EST ID:6FQAmMFX No.57222 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>57219
I <3 option 1 & 3 made me rofl
>>
Isabella Clondlefield - Sat, 15 Jul 2017 10:22:21 EST ID:6FQAmMFX No.57223 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>57221
I know there is no evidence of the historical Jesus I am strictly examining him as a character in the bible. Jesus as a character of mythology if you will.
>>
Cedric Soddlebodge - Tue, 08 Aug 2017 04:52:18 EST ID:lJYPBOas No.57243 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>57223
Admittedly i don't know much about this but i thought there were roman records of the crucificttion of Jesus and some other shit.
>>
Molly Clannerfidge - Thu, 10 Aug 2017 20:16:22 EST ID:JPVhQX35 No.57248 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>57223
There def is evidence of the historical Jesus.

>Virtually all New Testament scholars and Near East historians, applying the standard criteria of historical investigation, find that the historicity of Jesus is effectively certain [4][5][6][7][nb 1][nb 2][nb 3][nb 4] although they differ about the beliefs and teachings of Jesus as well as the accuracy of the details of his life that have been described in the gospels.[nb 5][13][nb 6][15]:168–173 While scholars have criticized Jesus scholarship for religious bias and lack of methodological soundness,[nb 7] with very few exceptions such critics generally do support the historicity of Jesus and reject the Christ myth theory that Jesus never existed.[17][nb 8][19][20][21]
>>
Molly Clannerfidge - Thu, 10 Aug 2017 20:20:42 EST ID:JPVhQX35 No.57249 Ignore Report Quick Reply
I think this is a decent summary of the most likely chain of events though much is still debated.

>Jesus was a Galilean Jew[12] who was baptized by John the Baptist and subsequently began his own ministry, preaching his message orally[24] and often being referred to as "rabbi".[25] He was arrested and tried by the Jewish religious authorities,[26] and turned over to the Roman government, and was subsequently crucified on the order of Pontius Pilate, the Roman prefect.[27] Jesus debated fellow Jews on how to best follow God, performed healings, taught in parables and gathered followers.[27][28] After his death, his followers believed he rose from the dead, and the community they formed eventually became the Christian Church.[29]
>>
Alice Buttingtutch - Thu, 10 Aug 2017 23:59:32 EST ID:Redgi3D4 No.57250 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>57249
It's pretty interesting how a man as simple as your statement suggests, has over time turned into the head of the monolith that is Christianity.
>>
Albert Chanderwater - Sat, 19 Aug 2017 03:00:58 EST ID:rbK+gS1r No.57256 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>57250
Remember, a fuckload of proto christians died for that community. Bashed to death and shanked to death by fellow proto christians. Proto christians took their apostle cult warfare extremely serioys.
>>
David Chidgefield - Wed, 18 Oct 2017 00:17:43 EST ID:ueQZvpy5 No.57281 Ignore Report Quick Reply
This is obvious to anyone with a basic understanding of the historiography of the Bible save Christians who aren't interested in your logic. What's more important is what type of cult leader Jesus was and how he practiced in reality as opposed to what the Gospels lay down. That's more important when documenting the formation of the religion and understanding how it went on to influence people in later ages.
>>
Simon Fuckingville - Sat, 21 Oct 2017 17:00:29 EST ID:flID+PsE No.57284 Ignore Report Quick Reply
I've always had a feeling that whatever smoking gun contemporary records or accounts that prove Jesus was just a simple cult leader have either been outright destroyed by the Catholic Church or locked away in their deepest Vatican vaults. Would not even be surprised if the Catholic Church has its' tentacles buried deep into the field of archaeology as to intercept such evidence before it can be properly analyzed and distributed into the public.
>>
Simon Gonnercocke - Thu, 26 Oct 2017 17:25:15 EST ID:rbK+gS1r No.57285 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>57284
Impossible. Whatever the Vatican could pay archeologists, doesn't weigh up to the gains gotten from busting the whole thing with evidence.

The very competitive nature of science makes it impossible to create information-limiting conspiracies.
>>
Frederick Blobblewill - Mon, 19 Feb 2018 11:39:45 EST ID:vZXg7z/l No.57386 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>57285
the vatican has a giant disclosed library full of books hidden from the public, perhaps that's where they keep those books
>>
Martin Funninghall - Tue, 20 Feb 2018 18:14:26 EST ID:rbK+gS1r No.57388 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>57386
The Vatican's forbidden books are in my opinion probably books written by cult leaders throughout the ages (I imagine it holds Cathar books for example), and just gnostic or mystic christian books in general.
>>
Hannah Hecklewell - Tue, 27 Feb 2018 08:15:23 EST ID:tzC97MoX No.57391 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>57218

i think OP you're being slightly harsh on jesus here, not way off, just reading some sinister intentions in to what may have been genuine philosophy, misguided or not.

first of all Jesus may not have ever claimed to be capable of miracles. For instance take the fish and bread that fed too many people, maybe in real life, Jesus convinced a large number of very hungry people to share a relatively small amount of food and everybody ended up with some. That might constitute a "miracle" in some sense, it would be the kind of thing that would make you respect the charisma and authority of somebody, without it being actually supernatural. And then 5-8 generations and 100-200 years later when the gospels were written (just ball parking here) the story had morphed into full miracles

pretty much all of the miracles i could find in the gospels could be explained in similar ways, turning the water to wine could be done in a similar way to the fish and bread, maybe he was just good at planning parties in an era where most parties ended up with physical altercations over the wine. as for raising people from the dead i dont recall him ever raising anybody who wasnt recently deceased and ancient medical knowledge wasnt that good, maybe some poor souls werent really dead and had a brief bit of awareness when jesus happened to come through and bless them

so i dont think the miracles thing is necessarily evidence that Jesus was deceiving his disciples.

as far as asking that his followers abandon family and possessions, there's no doubt this is a hallmark of cult behavior, however, i think there's a difference between deceptive narcisissitic cults and genuinely deluded cults, like the difference between charles manson's cult and mormonism

maybe jesus really truly believed his followers would achieve the highest truth, morality, etc by giving up everything and following him, he would not be even remotely alone in thinking this way, its basically the story of like every ancient buddhist/eastern spiritual leader

this applies to the fact that he focuses everything on himself too, if he really thought he had discovered the secrets of the universe, then it would only be right for everybody to drop everything and listen to him, and maybe he really thought there was no better use for a ton of expensive perfume than to make some cryptic philophical point (i actually dont remember what the perfume thing was about)

so to summarize, i definitely agree he was a cult leader, but im not so sure he was a manipulative guy, when his story is not so different from tons of other earnest spiritual leaders throughout history
>>
Edwin Tootbury - Sat, 24 Mar 2018 12:34:56 EST ID:PmmRJlWL No.57411 Ignore Report Quick Reply
>>57388
If true, it'd be pointless to keep them so secret. Nobody cares about dualism in 2018. There's plenty enough Gnostic texts out there to piece together what they believed. All they'd be doing is hindering the progress of archaeology. Would you not want to provide evidence of the success of your past conquests?

No, I suspect the texts in that library are far more 'foundational' than heretical.
>>
Walter Hillerhood - Wed, 04 Apr 2018 17:05:55 EST ID:IlyKIasb No.57430 Ignore Report Quick Reply
OP's observation is neither new nor particularly unique btw.

>>57250
As Simon bar Kokhba, but he is not remembered like Jesus was because his followers blew their load fast.

It is better to say that Hellenistic age Judaism fostered both messianic and proselytic tendencies that manifested in a diverse set of cultic beliefs based on individual spiritual leaders, of which Christianity was one and the birth of Gnosticism is likely tied into this process where regional communities could have significant sway over scriptural interpretation.

In other words, Judaism by the 1st century AD was rapidly diversifying as a congregation far away from Herod's Temple. This was the beginning of the diaspora, and in the beginning, it was fueled by converts. Modern Judaism discourages converts, but the Maccabees readily encouraged the conversion of gentiles to ward off centuries of depopulation in Judea proper. There were dense populations in Alexandria and Cyprus, Greece, Syria, and Rome itself. They were not active in banking, which was predominately dominated by established Latin or Greek banking charters that had evolved from the temple lending system of Archaic times.

In this context, much like you can trace evolutionary ancestors back by comparing structural similarities, the birth of Christianity becomes quite clear.


Report Post
Reason
Note
Please be descriptive with report notes,
this helps staff resolve issues quicker.